GHSA-6PW3-H7XF-X4GP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-14 16:52 – Updated: 2026-01-14 19:50
VLAI?
Summary
BlackSheep's ClientSession is vulnerable to CRLF injection
Details

Impact

The HTTP Client implementation in BlackSheep is vulnerable to CRLF injection. Missing headers validation makes it possible for an attacker to modify the HTTP requests (e.g. insert a new header) or even create a new HTTP request. Exploitation requires developers to pass unsanitized user input directly into headers. The server part is not affected because BlackSheep delegates to an underlying ASGI server handling of response headers.

Attack vector: Applications using user input in HTTP client requests (method, URL, headers).

Patches

Users who use the HTTP Client in BlackSheep should upgrade to 2.4.6.

Workarounds

If users handle headers from untrusted parties, they might reject values for header names and values that contain carriage returns.

References

https://owasp.org/www-community/vulnerabilities/CRLF_Injection

Severity ?
6.3 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "blacksheep"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.6"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-22779"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-113",
      "CWE-93"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-14T16:52:53Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-01-14T17:16:09Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\nThe HTTP Client implementation in BlackSheep is vulnerable to CRLF injection. Missing headers validation makes it possible for an attacker to modify the HTTP requests (e.g. insert a new header) or even create a new HTTP request.\nExploitation requires developers to pass unsanitized user input directly into headers.\nThe server part is not affected because BlackSheep delegates to an underlying ASGI server handling of response headers.\n\n**Attack vector:** Applications using user input in HTTP client requests (method, URL, headers).\n\n### Patches\nUsers who use the HTTP Client in BlackSheep should upgrade to `2.4.6`.\n\n### Workarounds\nIf users handle headers from untrusted parties, they might reject values for header names and values that contain carriage returns.\n\n### References\nhttps://owasp.org/www-community/vulnerabilities/CRLF_Injection",
  "id": "GHSA-6pw3-h7xf-x4gp",
  "modified": "2026-01-14T19:50:38Z",
  "published": "2026-01-14T16:52:53Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Neoteroi/BlackSheep/security/advisories/GHSA-6pw3-h7xf-x4gp"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22779"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Neoteroi/BlackSheep/commit/bd4ecb9542b5d52442276b5a6907931b90f38d12"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/Neoteroi/BlackSheep"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Neoteroi/BlackSheep/releases/tag/v2.4.6"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "BlackSheep\u0027s ClientSession is vulnerable to CRLF injection"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.