Skip to content

Microdot has HTTP response splitting in Response.set_cookie()

Low severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 24, 2026 in miguelgrinberg/microdot • Updated May 13, 2026

Package

pip microdot (pip)

Affected versions

< 2.6.1

Patched versions

2.6.1

Description

Impact

The Response.set_cookie() method does not sanitize its string arguments, and in particular will not detect the presence of the \r\n sequence in them. This can be a potential source of header injection attacks.

For a header injection attack through this issue to be possible, an attacker must first infiltrate the client (for example through an independent XSS attack), so that it can send malicious information that is destined to be stored in a cookie by the server on behalf of the victim. An attacker that infiltrates one client can only orchestrate a header injection attack for that client, all other clients that were not infiltrated are safe.

Patches

Upgrade to version 2.6.1.

Workarounds

Do not pass untrusted data to the Response.set_cookie() method.

References

@miguelgrinberg miguelgrinberg published to miguelgrinberg/microdot Apr 24, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 5, 2026
Reviewed May 5, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 11, 2026
Last updated May 13, 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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A: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.
(16th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')

The product receives data from an HTTP agent/component (e.g., web server, proxy, browser, etc.), but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CR and LF characters before the data is included in outgoing HTTP headers. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-42874

GHSA ID

GHSA-7wc8-wvc4-m498

Source code

Credits

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