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

GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44

GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in crawlee. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

Crawlee for Python: SSRF via sitemap-derived URLs

Also known asCVE-2026-46497PYSEC-2026-2430
Published
May 21, 2026
Updated
Jul 13, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Aug 18, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs21th percentile — riskier than 21% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.26%0.52%0.79%0.3%0.3%0.3%Jul 26Aug 26Aug 26

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.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍crawlee

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

Overview

  • Vulnerability type: Blind SSRF
  • Affected components: src/crawlee/_utils/sitemap.py, src/crawlee/_utils/robots.py, src/crawlee/request_loaders/_sitemap_request_loader.py, and all built-in HTTP clients.
  • Trigger: an attacker-controlled sitemap or robots.txt containing a URL that points to an internal host (layer 1) or uses a non-http scheme (layer 2).

Two-layer SSRF via sitemap-derived URLs:

1) Cross-host HTTP SSRF

Base case, affects every HTTP client.** Sitemap entries and robots.txt Sitemap: directives were accepted regardless of the host they pointed to. A sitemap on example.com could push http://internal.corp/admin into the crawler's queue, and the configured HTTP client would dispatch the request.

2) Non-HTTP scheme SSRF

Escalation, only CurlImpersonateHttpClient.** Nested-sitemap fetching dispatches the URL straight to the HTTP client, bypassing the Request construction step where Pydantic enforces http(s). Combined with the libcurl-backed CurlImpersonateHttpClient, this lets gopher://, file://, dict://, ftp://, etc., through.

Root cause

Crawlee already validates URL schemes through Pydantic's AnyHttpUrl (via validate_http_url in src/crawlee/_utils/urls.py) wherever a crawl target is materialised as a Request: the Request.url field is declared as Annotated[str, BeforeValidator(validate_http_url), Field(frozen=True)]. Anything that becomes a Request is therefore guaranteed to be http(s).

Two parts of the sitemap pipeline sidestepped this property in different ways:

1) Sitemap-derived URLs were enqueued without any host policy

SitemapRequestLoader took every <urlset><url><loc> entry, wrapped it in Request.from_url (which accepts any valid http(s) URL), and pushed the result into the request queue. RobotsTxtFile.get_sitemaps() returned every Sitemap: directive verbatim. Neither imposed any host check against the parent sitemap or robots.txt URL, so an attacker controlling that content could push internal-network HTTP URLs into the queue and have them crawled by whichever HTTP client was configured.

2) Nested sitemap fetching bypassed the Request chokepoint entirely

When _XmlSitemapParser encountered <sitemapindex><sitemap><loc>…</loc></sitemap></sitemapindex>, or when RobotsTxtFile.parse_sitemaps forwarded Sitemap: directives into the same pipeline, _fetch_and_process_sitemap dispatched the URL directly to the HTTP client:

async with http_client.stream(
    sitemap_url, 
    method='GET', 
    headers=SITEMAP_HEADERS, 
    proxy_info=proxy_info, 
    timeout=timeout,
) as response:
    ...

No Request was constructed, so the Pydantic validator never ran. Before the fix, the HTTP clients' own send_request() and stream() methods did not call validate_http_url either, so a non-http(s) scheme could pass straight through to the backend client.

The non-HTTP escalation in layer 2 is specific to CurlImpersonateHttpClient, which is backed by curl-cffi / libcurl and speaks gopher, file, dict, ftp, and other non-HTTP protocols. The other clients shipped with Crawlee (HttpxHttpClient, ImpitHttpClient, PlaywrightHttpClient) reject non-http(s) schemes at their own backend layer, regardless of what Crawlee passes in, so they were only affected by layer 1.

Vulnerable paths

Layer 1 — cross-host HTTP (all HTTP clients)

  • Source: an attacker-controlled sitemap that lists internal URLs under <urlset><url><loc> or <sitemapindex><sitemap><loc>, or an attacker-controlled robots.txt that lists internal URLs under Sitemap:.
  • Sink: the configured HTTP client issues GET requests against those URLs — either via client.request(url=request.url, …) inside crawl() for regular sitemap URLs, or via client.stream(url, …) inside the nested-sitemap fetch.

Layer 2 — non-HTTP schemes (CurlImpersonateHttpClient only)

  • Source: a nested <sitemap><loc> entry or a robots.txt Sitemap: directive pointing to a non-http(s) URL.
  • Sink: CurlImpersonateHttpClient.stream(...) hands the URL string verbatim to client.request(url=…, …), which dispatches via libcurl.

Hardening in 1.7.0 was added at both producer and consumer ends — see Remediation.

Exploitation preconditions

  1. The crawler uses sitemap loading: any of SitemapRequestLoader, Sitemap.load / parse_sitemap, discover_valid_sitemaps, or RobotsTxtFile.parse_sitemaps.
  2. The attacker controls the body of a sitemap or robots.txt that the crawler fetches — typically by being the target site, or by getting a target site to publish a malicious sitemap.
  3. The crawler's network egress can reach the attacker-chosen destination (e.g., internal services on the same network).
  4. The targeted endpoint accepts unauthenticated requests. Crawlee does not supply credentials to the forged destination, so authenticated services (IMDSv2 with token, password-protected Redis, protected admin panels) are not reachable through this path.

For layer 2 (non-HTTP), the configured HTTP client must additionally be CurlImpersonateHttpClient.

Impact

Layer 1 — cross-host HTTP (any client)

The crawler can be coerced into issuing GET requests against internal HTTP services on its own network: admin panels, unauthenticated internal APIs, cloud metadata endpoints, etc. Read-back is blind — Crawlee surfaces fetched content only through its local Dataset / KeyValueStore (push_data() etc.) and does not natively forward scraped bodies anywhere external — so direct impact is mostly existence/timing probing and occasional state changes via side-effecting GET endpoints. Read-side leakage of internal content is only exploitable end-to-end if the deployer's own application separately exposes scraped data (for example, a public summariser or aggregator built on top of Crawlee).

Layer 2 — non-HTTP escalation (only CurlImpersonateHttpClient)

Under the affected client, attackers gain the libcurl scheme set:

  • gopher:// is the canonical RESP-injection vector: pipeline FLUSHALL, CONFIG SET dir, CONFIG SET dbfilename, SAVE to an unauthenticated Redis on the crawler's network — enough to write attacker-controlled bytes to disk and, in the standard escalation, achieve remote code execution on the Redis host.
  • file:// allows the crawler to read local files (application secrets, configuration) on the crawler host.
  • dict:// and ftp:// permit fingerprinting and limited interaction with text-protocol services.

In both layers, the SSRF is blind in the default configuration. Write-side impact (gopher:// → Redis) and timing-based internal probing do not depend on read-back and remain viable regardless of whether the deployer surfaces scraped content.

Remediation

Both layers are fixed in crawlee==1.7.0. The fix is split across two PRs, applied at the two complementary boundaries of the affected pipeline:

  1. Producer-side filtering — sitemap and robots.txt loaders (PR #1864). SitemapRequestLoader and RobotsTxtFile.get_sitemaps() now run every nested-sitemap entry, every regular sitemap URL, and every Sitemap: directive through crawlee._utils.urls.filter_url. This applies to an EnqueueStrategy (default 'same-hostname') against the parent sitemap / robots.txt URL — cross-host entries are dropped — and rejects non-http(s) schemes. The strategy is stamped onto the emitted Requests, so BasicCrawler._check_url_after_redirects continues policing the policy across redirects.
  2. Consumer-side validation — HTTP-client boundary (PR #1862). validate_http_url(url) is now called at the top of send_request() and stream() in ImpitHttpClient, HttpxHttpClient, CurlImpersonateHttpClient, and PlaywrightHttpClient. Non-http(s) schemes raise pydantic.ValidationError before any backend call. crawl() was already covered, because Request.url is validated by Pydantic on construction.

After these changes, validation is enforced both where sitemap-derived HTTP requests are produced (sitemap and robots.txt loaders) and where they are consumed (HTTP clients). A regression at either layer is caught by the other.

Behaviour change for upgraders

SitemapRequestLoader and RobotsTxtFile.get_sitemaps() now default to enqueue_strategy='same-hostname'. Deployers that legitimately relied on cross-host sitemap entries (e.g., a sitemap index on sitemaps.example.com that points to content on www.example.com) must opt in explicitly with enqueue_strategy='same-domain' or enqueue_strategy='all'.

Finder credits

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIcrawlee1.0.0&&< 1.7.01.7.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for crawlee. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update crawlee to 1.7.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 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 pinpoints whether GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Overview - **Vulnerability type:** Blind SSRF - **Affected components:** `src/crawlee/_utils/sitemap.py`, `src/crawlee/_utils/robots.py`, `src/crawlee/request_loaders/_sitemap_request_loader.py`, and all built-in HTTP clients. - **Trigger:** an attacker-controlled sitemap or `robots.txt` containing a URL that points to an internal host (layer 1) or uses a non-http scheme (layer 2). Two-layer SSRF via sitemap-derived URLs: ### 1) Cross-host HTTP SSRF Base case, affects every HTTP client.** Sitemap entries and `robots.txt` `Sitemap:` directives were accepted regardless of the host they po
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44 across PyPI dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-3r75-xc34-5f44: Crawlee for Python:… | O3 Security