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

GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq — starlette

HIGH

GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-770 vulnerability in starlette. A fix is available for starlette — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Starlette: request.form() limits silently ignored for application/x-www-form-urlencoded enable DoS

Also known asCVE-2026-54283PYSEC-2026-249
Published
Jun 15, 2026
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 26, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
  • 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 GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs39th percentile — riskier than 39% 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

GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq 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 379,842 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
🐍starlette

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

request.form() accepts max_fields and max_part_size to bound resource consumption while parsing form data. These limits are enforced for multipart/form-data, but silently ignored for application/x-www-form-urlencoded. An unauthenticated attacker can therefore send a urlencoded body with an arbitrarily large number of fields or an arbitrarily large field, even when the application configured limits it believed would apply.

Details

request.form() dispatches to a different parser depending on the Content-Type. For multipart/form-data the max_files, max_fields, and max_part_size limits are forwarded to the parser, but for application/x-www-form-urlencoded the parser is constructed without them. It has no max_fields or max_part_size parameter to receive them, and it appends every field with no count check and accumulates each field's name and value with no size check. The configured limits are therefore both unreachable and unenforced for url-encoded bodies.

Because the url-encoded parser does its work synchronously between stream reads, the two attack shapes have different effects:

  • Field count drives CPU and event-loop blocking. A body of ~1,000,000 fields (a sub-10MB payload such as f0=v&f1=v&...) blocks the worker's event loop for several seconds while parsing, during which the worker serves no other request.
  • Field size drives memory. A single large field value (e.g. a 50MB value) is buffered in full to build the FormData, forcing memory allocation proportional to the request body.

The equivalent multipart/form-data request is correctly rejected with 400 Too many fields / 400 Field exceeded maximum size.

Impact

This Denial of service (DoS) vulnerability affects all applications built with Starlette (or FastAPI) that call request.form() on application/x-www-form-urlencoded requests. A single request with a very large number of fields blocks the event loop for several seconds, and a single request with a very large field forces unbounded memory allocation; in either case, parallel requests can render the service unusable. A reverse proxy that enforces a request body size limit reduces but does not eliminate the exposure, since a sub-10MB body is already enough to block the event loop.

Mitigation

Upgrade to a patched version, which forwards max_fields and max_part_size to the url-encoded parser and enforces them while parsing, raising before the oversized field or excess fields are accumulated. The defaults match multipart/form-data (max_fields=1000, max_part_size=1MB) and can be customized via request.form(max_fields=..., max_part_size=...).

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIstarlette≥ 0.4.1&&< 1.3.11.3.1pip install --upgrade 'starlette==1.3.1'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Fix

    Update starlette to 1.3.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    Cap what an attacker can consume: apply request size, rate and timeout limits in front of the affected component, and run it with memory and CPU limits so exhaustion degrades one worker rather than the whole service.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatImportant

A flaw was found in Starlette where the request.form() method silently ignores configured resource limits (max_fields and max_part_size) when parsing application/x-www-form-urlencoded data. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit this by sending a urlencoded request body with an arbitrarily large number of fields or…

Workaround published by Red Hat
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base or stability.
Source: Red Hat security advisory for GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq (CC BY 4.0)
ProductFixed inAdvisory
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.2rhaiis/vllm-cuda-rhel9:1782951012RHSA-2026:36005
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.2rhaiis/vllm-rocm-rhel9:1782951244RHSA-2026:36006
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.2rhaiis/vllm-cuda-rhel9:1787860580RHSA-2026:61627
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.4rhaii/vllm-spyre-rhel9:1789681201RHSA-2026:69464
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.4rhaii/vllm-cpu-rhel9:1789681128RHSA-2026:69466
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.4rhaii/vllm-cuda-rhel9:1789681126RHSA-2026:69467
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.4rhaii/vllm-rocm-rhel9:1789681126RHSA-2026:69469
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.4rhaii/vllm-cpu-rhel9:1790075793RHSA-2026:70965

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary `request.form()` accepts `max_fields` and `max_part_size` to bound resource consumption while parsing form data. These limits are enforced for `multipart/form-data`, but silently ignored for `application/x-www-form-urlencoded`. An unauthenticated attacker can therefore send a urlencoded body with an arbitrarily large number of fields or an arbitrarily large field, even when the application configured limits it believed would apply. ### Details `request.form()` dispatches to a different parser depending on the `Content-Type`. For `multipart/form-data` the `max_files`, `max_fields`,
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-82w8-qh3p-5jfq: starlette (High 7.5) | O3 Security