Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 2.84% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2021
CVE-2021-32618High confidence
Open Redirect Vulnerability
Flask-Middleware · flask-security
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-6QMF-FJ6M-686C ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
3.1LowCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedLow technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityLow→Operational priority:Low, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Flask-Middleware flask-security and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
1 package stateRelease-specific package status
ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | flask-security | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
The Python "Flask-Security-Too" package is used for adding security features to your Flask application. It is an is an independently maintained version of Flask-Security based on the 3.0.0 version of Flask-Security. All versions of Flask-Security-Too allow redirects after many successful views (e.g. /login) by honoring the ?next query param. There is code in FS to validate that the url specified in the next parameter is either relative OR has the same netloc (network location) as the requesting URL. This check utilizes Pythons urlsplit library. However many browsers are very lenient on the kind of URL they accept and 'fill in the blanks' when presented with a possibly incomplete URL. As a concrete example - setting http://login?next=\\\github.com will pass FS's relative URL check however many browsers will gladly convert this to http://github.com. Thus an attacker could send such a link to an unwitting user, using a legitimate site and have it redirect to whatever site they want. This is considered a low severity due to the fact that if Werkzeug is used (which is very common with Flask applications) as the WSGI layer, it by default ALWAYS ensures that the Location header is absolute - thus making this attack vector mute. It is possible for application writers to modify this default behavior by setting the 'autocorrect_location_header=False`.
What
The Python "Flask-Security-Too" package is used for adding security features to your Flask application. It is an is an independently maintained version of Flask-Security based on the 3.0.0 version of Flask-Security. All versions of Flask-Security-Too allow redirects after many successful views (e.g. /login) by honoring the ?next query param. There is code in FS to validate that the url specified in the next parameter is either relative OR has the same netloc (network location) as the requesting URL. This check utilizes Pythons urlsplit library. However many browsers are very lenient on the kind of URL they accept and 'fill in the blanks' when presented with a possibly incomplete URL. As a concrete example - setting http://login?next=\\\github.com will pass FS's relative URL check however many browsers will gladly convert this to http://github.com. Thus an attacker could send such a link to an unwitting user, using a legitimate site and have it redirect to whatever site they want. This is considered a low severity due to the fact that if Werkzeug is used (which is very common with Flask applications) as the WSGI layer, it by default ALWAYS ensures that the Location header is absolute - thus making this attack vector mute. It is possible for application writers to modify this default behavior by setting the 'autocorrect_location_header=False`.
Why
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The Python "Flask-Security-Too" package is used for adding security features to your Flask application. It is an is an independently maintained version of Flask-Security based on the 3.0.0 version of Flask-Security. All versions of Flask-Security-Too allow redirects after many successful views (e.g. /login) by honoring the ?next query param. There is code in FS to validate that the url specified in the next parameter is either relative OR has the same netloc (network location) as the requesting URL. This check utilizes Pythons urlsplit library. However many browsers are very lenient on the kind of URL they accept and 'fill in the blanks' when presented with a possibly incomplete URL. As a concrete example - setting http://login?next=\\\github.com will pass FS's relative URL check however many browsers will gladly convert this to http://github.com. Thus an attacker could send such a link to an unwitting user, using a legitimate site and have it redirect to whatever site they want. This is considered a low severity due to the fact that if Werkzeug is used (which is very common with Flask applications) as the WSGI layer, it by default ALWAYS ensures that the Location header is absolute - thus making this attack vector mute. It is possible for application writers to modify this default behavior by setting the 'autocorrect_location_header=False`.
Why
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Required interaction required
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-601 ↗
CWE-601: URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect'). The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- flask-security: <= 4.0.1
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 17 May 2021 · Last source change 3 Aug 2024, 23:25 UTC · CWE-601 · URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2021-0086
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.