How severe is GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq?

No CVSS score has been assigned to GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq?

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq affects the following packages: aiohttp (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq?

Update aiohttp to 3.14.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq in my PyPI dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

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.

Is GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq?

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.4%, placing it in the 29th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq?

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq is classified as CWE-807 (CWE-807). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq was published on October 20, 2026 and was last updated on October 20, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐍 PyPI

Not in CISA KEV

AIOHTTP: Absolute-form request targets can spoof Request.schemeGHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq

Fix: aio-libs/aiohttp@6d4e7b0

GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq is a CWE-807 vulnerability in aiohttp. A fix is available for aiohttp — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-111748

Published

Oct 20, 2026

Updated

Oct 20, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Oct 23, 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 GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs29th percentile — riskier than 29% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🐍aiohttp

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

AIOHTTP is an asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python. Prior to 3.14.4, an attacker can send an absolute-form request that causes Request.scheme to use attacker-controlled request-target scheme data instead of the connection protocol. Applications that use Request.scheme for security decisions can consequently be tricked into treating an unencrypted connection as encrypted or an encrypted connection as unencrypted. This issue is fixed in version 3.14.4.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`aiohttp`	all versions	3.14.4`pip install --upgrade 'aiohttp==3.14.4'`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for aiohttp, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update aiohttp to 3.14.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary An attacker sending an absolute-form request can spoof the scheme used. ### Impact If user code depends on the `Request.scheme` attribute for anything security related, an attacker may be able to circumvent this logic, tricking the application into thinking a connection is encrypted when it is not, or vice versa. ### Workaround A WAF rule to reject absolute-form requests (legitimate requests should only use this form for proxies).

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-f9xw-jh8m-3mwq in your dependencies?

Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works