BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-23941High confidence

Request smuggling via first-wins Content-Length parsing in inets httpd

Erlang · OTP

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-W4JC-9WPV-PQH7 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

7.0HighCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.45% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Erlang OTP and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

5 package states
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 releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourceerlangVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1:27.3.4.1+dfsg-1+deb13u2Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourceerlangVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1:25.2.3+dfsg-1+deb12u4Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourceerlangVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1:27.3.4.9+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourceerlangVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1:27.3.4.9+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archiveerlangVendor fix publishedCanonical reports that a fixed source package version has been published. Repository candidate availability is not checked by BlackTree.1:25.3.2.8+dfsg-1ubuntu4.7Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-11776

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request Smuggling') vulnerability in Erlang OTP (inets httpd module) allows HTTP Request Smuggling. This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/inets/src/http_server/httpd_request.erl and program routines httpd_request:parse_headers/7. The server does not reject or normalize duplicate Content-Length headers. The earliest Content-Length in the request is used for body parsing while common reverse proxies (nginx, Apache httpd, Envoy) honor the last Content-Length value. This violates RFC 9112 Section 6.3 and allows front-end/back-end desynchronization, leaving attacker-controlled bytes queued as the start of the next request. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 28.4.1, OTP 27.3.4.9 and OTP 26.2.5.18, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.6.1, 9.3.2.3 and 9.1.0.5.

What

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request Smuggling') vulnerability in Erlang OTP (inets httpd module) allows HTTP Request Smuggling. This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/inets/src/http_server/httpd_request.erl and program routines httpd_request:parse_headers/7. The server does not reject or normalize duplicate Content-Length headers. The earliest Content-Length in the request is used for body parsing while common reverse proxies (nginx, Apache httpd, Envoy) honor the last Content-Length value. This violates RFC 9112 Section 6.3 and allows front-end/back-end desynchronization, leaving attacker-controlled bytes queued as the start of the next request. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 28.4.1, OTP 27.3.4.9 and OTP 26.2.5.18, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.6.1, 9.3.2.3 and 9.1.0.5.

Why

The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request Smuggling') vulnerability in Erlang OTP (inets httpd module) allows HTTP Request Smuggling. This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/inets/src/http_server/httpd_request.erl and program routines httpd_request:parse_headers/7. The server does not reject or normalize duplicate Content-Length headers. The earliest Content-Length in the request is used for body parsing while common reverse proxies (nginx, Apache httpd, Envoy) honor the last Content-Length value. This violates RFC 9112 Section 6.3 and allows front-end/back-end desynchronization, leaving attacker-controlled bytes queued as the start of the next request. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 28.4.1, OTP 27.3.4.9 and OTP 26.2.5.18, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.6.1, 9.3.2.3 and 9.1.0.5.

Why

The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or 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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

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 → Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-444 ↗

CWE-444: Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling'). The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: 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.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCNoneVulnerable-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VINoneVulnerable-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCHighSubsequent-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SIHighSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SALowSubsequent-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.
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.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-444
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-0721Erlang/OTP: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Erlang/OTP ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen oder HTTP-Request-Smuggling zu erreichen, was weitere Angriffe ermöglicht.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0436Multiples vulnérabilités dans Tenable Identity Exposure

d?id=CVE-2026-21218 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21637 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21637 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21710 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21710 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21713 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21713 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21714 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21714 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21715 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21715 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21716 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21716 Référence CVE CVE-2026-21717 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-21717 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23941 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23941 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23942 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23942 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23943 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23943 Référence CVE CVE-2026-26115 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-26115 Référence CVE CVE-2026-26130 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-26130 Référence CVE CVE-2026-3783 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-3783 Référence CVE CVE-2026-3784 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-3784 Référence CVE CVE-2026-3805 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-3805 Gestion détaillée du document le 15 avril 2026 Version initiale le 1

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0321Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans les produits Microsoft. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer un problème de sécurité non spécifié par l'éditeur.

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-016922ERLANGのErlang/Inets (Inets)等の複数製品におけるHTTP リクエストスマグリングに関する脆弱性

Erlang OTPのinets httpdモジュールには、HTTPリクエストの不整合解釈(いわゆる「HTTPリクエストスマグリング」)の脆弱性が存在し、HTTPリクエストスマグリング攻撃を受ける可能性があります。この脆弱性は、プログラムファイルlib/inets/src/http_server/httpd_request.erlおよびプログラムルーチンhttpd_request:parse_headers/7に関連しています。サーバーは重複するContent-Lengthヘッダーを拒否したり正規化したりしません。リクエスト内で最も早期のContent-Lengthがボディ解析に使用される一方で、一般的なリバースプロキシであるnginx、Apache httpd、Envoyは最後のContent-Length値を尊重します。これはRFC 9112セクション6.3に違反し、フロントエンドとバックエンドの非同期処理を生じさせ、攻撃者が制御するバイトが次のリクエストの開始としてキューに残されることを許してしまいます。この問題はOTP 17.0からOTP 28.4.1、OTP 27.3.4.9およびOTP 26.2.5.18までのOTPバージョンに影響を及ぼし、対応するinetsのバージョンでは5.10から9.6.1、9.3.2.3および9.1.0.5までに影響が確認されています。

Official advisory ↗
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.
Patch available
Affected
OTP: 5.10 < *, 17.0 < *, 84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1 < *
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
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 13 Mar 2026 · Last source change 24 Jul 2026, 14:15 UTC · CWE-444 · Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-11776
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

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-23941 · cve.blacktree.nl