Skip to content

Tesla vulnerable to multipart part smuggling via unescaped `content-disposition` values

Low severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 2, 2026 in elixir-tesla/tesla • Updated Jul 10, 2026

Package

erlang tesla (Erlang)

Affected versions

>= 0.8.0, < 1.18.3

Patched versions

1.18.3

Description

Summary

Tesla.Multipart.part_headers_for_disposition/1 interpolates Content-Disposition parameter values (field name, filename, and other opts) verbatim into the part header line without encoding or escaping any special characters. An attacker who controls a filename, field name, or other disposition parameter can use unescaped double-quotes to inject extra disposition key-value pairs, or CRLF sequences to inject additional part headers or prepend bytes to the part body.

Details

part_headers_for_disposition/1 in lib/tesla/multipart.ex formats each disposition parameter as k="v" with no sanitization. Values flow in from add_field/4 (the name argument), add_file/3 and add_file_content/4 (the filename argument and any disposition opts). A " in the value closes the quoted parameter early, allowing extra ; key="value" pairs to be appended. A \r\n ends the Content-Disposition header line entirely, with subsequent bytes interpreted as additional part headers (e.g. a forged Content-Type); a second \r\n ends the whole part header block and prepends attacker bytes to the part body.

The default-filename path in add_file/3 derives the name via Path.basename/1, which does not strip CR or LF, so any code that forwards a partially attacker-controlled file path is equally vulnerable.

PoC

  1. Call Tesla.Multipart.add_file_content/4 with a filename containing \r\nX-Injected: evil.
  2. POST the multipart body to any upstream via any Tesla adapter.
  3. The upstream receives X-Injected: evil as a standalone header line on the affected part.

Impact

Low severity (CVSS v4.0: 2.1). Any application using tesla 0.8.0 through 1.18.2 that passes untrusted input into add_field/4, add_file/3, or add_file_content/4 disposition parameters is affected. Consequences range from forging part-level headers to body prepending against lenient multipart parsers. Fixed in tesla 1.18.3.

Workarounds

Validate disposition parameter values before passing them to the multipart API, rejecting any value that contains \r, \n, or ".

Resources

References

@yordis yordis published to elixir-tesla/tesla Jun 2, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 2, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 10, 2026
Reviewed Jul 10, 2026
Last updated Jul 10, 2026

Severity

Low

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Local
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity Low
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(9th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output

The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-48598

GHSA ID

GHSA-28jh-g32x-v9v4

Source code

Credits

Dependabot alerts are not supported on some or all of the ecosystems on this advisory.

Learn more about GitHub language support

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.