Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

CVE-2026-41481 — langchain-text-splitters

MEDIUM

CVE-2026-41481 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in langchain-text-splitters. A fix is available for langchain-text-splitters — see the affected versions and patch details below.

LangChain: HTMLHeaderTextSplitter.split_text_from_url SSRF Redirect Bypass

Also known asGHSA-fv5p-p927-qmxrPYSEC-2026-77
Published
Apr 24, 2026
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 24, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-41481.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs35th percentile — riskier than 35% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

How urgent is this, really

CVE-2026-41481 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 379,145 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍langchain-text-splitters

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

HTMLHeaderTextSplitter.split_text_from_url() validated the initial URL using validate_safe_url() but then performed the fetch with requests.get() with redirects enabled (the default). Because redirect targets were not revalidated, a URL pointing to an attacker-controlled server could redirect to internal, localhost, or cloud metadata endpoints, bypassing SSRF protections.

The response body is parsed and returned as Document objects to the calling application code. Whether this constitutes a data exfiltration path depends on the application: if it exposes Document contents (or derivatives) back to the requester who supplied the URL, sensitive data from internal endpoints could be leaked. Applications that store or process Documents internally without returning raw content to the requester are not directly exposed to data exfiltration through this issue.

Affected versions

  • langchain-text-splitters < 1.1.2

Patched versions

  • langchain-text-splitters >= 1.1.2 (requires langchain-core >= 1.2.31)

Affected code

File: libs/text-splitters/langchain_text_splitters/html.py — split_text_from_url()

The vulnerable pattern validated the URL once then fetched with redirects enabled:

validate_safe_url(url, allow_private=False, allow_http=True)
response = requests.get(url, timeout=timeout, **kwargs)

Attack scenario

  1. A developer passes external URLs to split_text_from_url(), relying on its built-in validate_safe_url() check to block requests to internal networks.
  2. An attacker supplies a URL pointing to a public host they control. The URL passes validate_safe_url() (public hostname, public IP).
  3. The attacker's server responds with a 302 redirect to an internal endpoint (e.g., an unauthenticated internal admin API, or a cloud instance metadata service that does not require request headers — such as AWS IMDSv1).
  4. requests.get() follows the redirect automatically. The redirect target is not revalidated.
  5. The response body is parsed and returned as Document objects to the application.

Notes:

  • The core issue is a bypass of an explicitly provided SSRF protection. split_text_from_url() included validate_safe_url() specifically to be safe with untrusted URLs — the redirect loophole defeated that guarantee.
  • Cloud metadata endpoints that require special headers (AWS IMDSv2, GCP, Azure) are not reachable through this bug because the attacker does not control request headers. AWS IMDSv1, which requires no headers, is reachable.
  • Data exfiltration requires the application to return Document contents to the party that supplied the URL. The SSRF itself — forcing the server to issue a request to an internal endpoint — does not require this.

Fix

The fix replaces requests.get() with an SSRF-safe httpx transport (SSRFSafeSyncTransport from langchain-core) that validates DNS results and pins connections to validated IPs on every request, including redirect targets, eliminating redirect-based bypasses.

Additionally, split_text_from_url() has been deprecated. Users should fetch HTML content themselves and pass it to split_text() directly.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIlangchain-text-splittersall versions1.1.2pip install --upgrade 'langchain-text-splitters==1.1.2'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for langchain-text-splitters, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update langchain-text-splitters to 1.1.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-41481 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-41481 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-41481. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary `HTMLHeaderTextSplitter.split_text_from_url()` validated the initial URL using `validate_safe_url()` but then performed the fetch with `requests.get()` with redirects enabled (the default). Because redirect targets were not revalidated, a URL pointing to an attacker-controlled server could redirect to internal, localhost, or cloud metadata endpoints, bypassing SSRF protections. The response body is parsed and returned as `Document` objects to the calling application code. Whether this constitutes a data exfiltration path depends on the application: if it exposes Document contents
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-41481 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-41481 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2026-41481: langchain-text (Medium 6.5) | O3 Security