Skip to content

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq CVE-2026-111748

AIOHTTP: Absolute-form request targets can spoof Request.scheme

Medium PyPI
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.39%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 32.74% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-807 Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
Fix
3.14.4
Upgrade aiohttp to this version or later

Description

Summary

An attacker sending an absolute-form request can spoof the scheme used.

Impact

If user code depends on the Request.scheme attribute for anything security related, an attacker may be able to circumvent this logic, tricking the application into thinking a connection is encrypted when it is not, or vice versa.

Workaround

A WAF rule to reject absolute-form requests (legitimate requests should only use this form for proxies).

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
aiohttp
< 3.14.4
3.14.4

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

aiohttp PyPI → 3.14.4

pip
pip install --upgrade "aiohttp>=3.14.4"
poetry
poetry add "aiohttp>=3.14.4"
uv
uv add "aiohttp>=3.14.4"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
Low
Integrity (vulnerable system)
Low
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

Weakness

CWE-807: Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision

The product uses a protection mechanism that relies on the existence or values of an input, but the input can be modified by an untrusted actor in a way that bypasses the protection mechanism.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Store state information and sensitive data on the server side only. Ensure that the system definitively and unambiguously keeps track of its own state and user state and has rules defined for legitimate state transitions. Do not allow any application user to affect state directly in any way other than through legitimate actions leading to state transitions. If information must be stored on the client, do not do so without encryption and integrity checking, or otherwise having a mechanism on the server side to catch tampering. Use a message authentication code (MAC) algorithm, such as Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC) [REF-529]. Apply this against the state or sensitive data that has to be exposed, which can guarantee the integrity of the data - i.e., that the data has not been modified. Ensure that a strong hash function is used (CWE-328).
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. With a stateless protocol such as HTTP, use a framework that maintains the state for you. Examples include ASP.NET View State [REF-756] and the OWASP ESAPI Session Management feature [REF-45]. Be careful of language features that provide state support, since these might be provided as a convenience to the programmer and may not be considering security.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls. Identify all inputs that are used for security decisions and determine if you can modify the design so that you do not have to rely on submitted inputs at all. For example, you may be able to keep critical information about the user's session on the server side instead of recording it within external data.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-pqxq-w44r-73xw
AIOHTTP: Pure-Python parser request smuggling
Medium Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-gx76-c99x-2c96
AIOHTTP: Cookie from subdomain can remove Host-Only Scope from existing cookies
Low Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-9xw5-w5jj-pvcg
AIOHTTP: File descriptor exhaustion in multipart requests
High Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-6cjc-53gc-5rqm
AIOHTTP: Connector pool exhaustion via Max-Age overflow
Medium Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-5wr8-gcqf-gqf3
aiohttp server lacks an initial request/header timeout
High Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-494j-54xm-rwp3
AIOHTTP: Secure attribute not enforced for shared cookie
Medium Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-2g87-pp6c-29x5
aiohttp: Multiple instances of excessive or unbounded memory/CPU use
High Also affects aiohttp
GHSA-cq5v-8q36-5273
AIOHTTP: Out-of-bounds heap read in C HTTP response parser error path (malformed chunked response)
High Also affects aiohttp
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor