PYSEC-2026-1222
Vulnerability from pysec - Published: 2026-07-07 16:03 - Updated: 2026-07-07 17:23Impact
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
| Name | purl | blacksheep | pkg:pypi/blacksheep |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "blacksheep",
"purl": "pkg:pypi/blacksheep"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"0.0.1",
"0.0.2",
"0.0.4",
"0.0.5",
"0.0.6",
"0.0.7",
"0.0.9",
"0.1.0",
"0.1.1",
"0.1.2",
"0.1.3",
"0.1.4",
"0.1.5",
"0.1.6",
"0.1.7",
"0.1.8",
"0.1.9",
"0.2.0",
"0.2.1",
"0.2.2",
"0.2.3",
"0.2.4",
"0.2.5",
"0.2.6",
"0.2.7",
"0.2.8",
"0.2.9",
"0.3.0",
"0.3.1",
"0.3.2",
"1.0.0",
"1.0.1",
"1.0.2",
"1.0.3",
"1.0.4",
"1.0.5",
"1.0.6",
"1.0.7",
"1.0.8",
"1.0.9",
"1.1.0",
"1.2.0",
"1.2.1",
"1.2.10",
"1.2.11",
"1.2.12",
"1.2.13",
"1.2.14",
"1.2.15",
"1.2.16",
"1.2.17",
"1.2.18",
"1.2.19",
"1.2.2",
"1.2.20",
"1.2.3",
"1.2.4",
"1.2.5",
"1.2.6",
"1.2.7",
"1.2.8",
"1.2.9",
"2.0.0",
"2.0.1",
"2.0.2",
"2.0.3",
"2.0.4",
"2.0.5",
"2.0.6",
"2.0.7",
"2.0.8",
"2.0a0",
"2.0a1",
"2.0a10",
"2.0a11",
"2.0a12",
"2.0a2",
"2.0a3",
"2.0a4",
"2.0a5",
"2.0a6",
"2.0a7",
"2.0a8",
"2.0a9",
"2.1.0",
"2.2.0",
"2.3.0",
"2.3.1",
"2.3.1a1",
"2.3.2",
"2.4.0",
"2.4.1",
"2.4.2",
"2.4.3",
"2.4.4",
"2.4.4a0",
"2.4.4a2",
"2.4.5"
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-22779",
"GHSA-6pw3-h7xf-x4gp"
],
"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": "PYSEC-2026-1222",
"modified": "2026-07-07T17:23:51.590371Z",
"published": "2026-07-07T16:03:18.908634Z",
"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"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://pypi.org/project/blacksheep"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-6pw3-h7xf-x4gp"
}
],
"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"
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
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.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.