GHSA-933H-HP56-HF7M

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-07 15:30 – Updated: 2026-04-08 15:29
VLAI?
Summary
Django: SGI requests with a missing or understated `Content-Length` header could bypass the `DATA_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` limit
Details

An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.4, 5.2 before 5.2.13, and 4.2 before 4.2.30. ASGI requests with a missing or understated Content-Length header could bypass the DATA_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE limit when reading HttpRequest.body, allowing remote attackers to load an unbounded request body into memory.

Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Superior for reporting this issue.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "Django"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "6.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.0.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "Django"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.2"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.2.13"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "Django"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.2"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.2.30"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-33034"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-770"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-08T15:29:09Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-04-07T15:17:39Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.4, 5.2 before 5.2.13, and 4.2 before 4.2.30. ASGI requests with a missing or understated `Content-Length` header could bypass the `DATA_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` limit when reading `HttpRequest.body`, allowing remote attackers to load an unbounded request body into memory.\n\nEarlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected.\nDjango would like to thank Superior for reporting this issue.",
  "id": "GHSA-933h-hp56-hf7m",
  "modified": "2026-04-08T15:29:09Z",
  "published": "2026-04-07T15:30:51Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-33034"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/security"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/django/django"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://groups.google.com/g/django-announce"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2026/apr/07/security-releases"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Django: SGI requests with a missing or understated `Content-Length` header could bypass the `DATA_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` limit"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.


Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…