Skip to content

aiosmtplib vulnerable to SMTP command injection via CR/LF in sender/recipient address

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 31, 2026 in cole/aiosmtplib • Updated Jul 7, 2026

Package

pip aiosmtplib (pip)

Affected versions

<= 5.1.0

Patched versions

5.1.1

Description

Summary

aiosmtplib's SMTP.mail(), SMTP.rcpt(), SMTP.vrfy() and SMTP.expn() send the caller-supplied email address to the server without rejecting embedded CR/LF (\r\n) bytes. An address that contains a CR/LF is written verbatim onto the SMTP control connection, so the bytes after the CRLF are framed by the server as one or more additional, standalone SMTP command lines. A caller that passes an attacker-influenced sender or recipient address into mail()/rcpt() (or vrfy()/expn()) therefore allows SMTP command injection (CWE-93 / CWE-77): the attacker can smuggle arbitrary SMTP verbs such as MAIL FROM, RCPT TO, RSET, DATA, or AUTH into the session. Injected commands will cause the SMTP instance to hang, but all commands required to complete the envelope could be sent in one address string.

The SMTP.sendmail() command will pass sender and recipient addresses verbatim through to SMTP.mail() & SMTP.rcpt(), and so is also vulnerable. SMTP.send_message() is not affected.

Impact

Severity: medium. Type: SMTP protocol command injection (CWE-93 — Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences; CWE-77 — Command Injection).

When an application built on aiosmtplib derives the envelope sender or any recipient from data an attacker can influence (a web form etc.) and passes it to mail()/rcpt() (directly, or via sendmail()/send() without a Message object), the attacker can:

  • desynchronize the command/response pipeline and cause the aiosmtplib client to hang, resulting in a possible denial of service
  • inject multiple commands in one address to send an arbitrary message

The address only needs to reach mail()/rcpt()/vrfy()/expn(); no attacker control over the SMTP server is required.

Vulnerable versions

Affected version: aiosmtplib 5.1.0 (latest at time of report) and all earlier releases.

Credit

Reported by tonghuaroot.

References

@cole cole published to cole/aiosmtplib May 31, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 7, 2026
Reviewed Jul 7, 2026
Last updated Jul 7, 2026

Severity

Moderate

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 Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity Low
Availability Low
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
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:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection')

The product uses CRLF (carriage return line feeds) as a special element, e.g. to separate lines or records, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CRLF sequences from inputs. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-53533

GHSA ID

GHSA-v3q9-hj7j-63hq

Source code

Credits

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