Oracle Database Server / RDBMS (Python) CVEs

Look up CVE IDs Status Exploitation Severity

Reset

Overview 21 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 2 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5

21matches 0in Waratek scope0.0% 0protected0.0% 0exploited0.0% 0CISA KEV0.0% 2public PoC9.5% 0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%

Protected by Waratek 0 0.0% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 0 0.0% Outside Waratek scope 0 0.0% Not applicable 21 100.0% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%

Critical 2 9.5% High 9 42.9% Medium 7 33.3% Low 3 14.3% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%

blocked by ARMR today 0 0.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 21 100.0% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%

Exploited 0 0.0% Working exploit published 0 0.0% Proof of concept only 6 28.6% Forecast only 0 0.0% No public exploit 15 71.4%

split by StatusSeverityProtectionExploit maturity peak 6 / quarter

Q2 231 Not applicable1 High1 not blocked1 Proof of concept only1 Q3 232 Not applicable2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 No public exploit2 Q4 230 Q1 240 Q2 240 Q3 242 Not applicable2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 Proof of concept only1 No public exploit1 Q4 241 Not applicable1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 Q1 251 Not applicable1 Low1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 Q2 256 Not applicable6 Critical1 High3 Medium2 not blocked6 Proof of concept only3 No public exploit3 Q3 252 Not applicable2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 No public exploit2 Q4 254 Not applicable4 Medium2 Low2 not blocked4 Proof of concept only1 No public exploit3 Q1 261 Not applicable1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 Q2 260 Q3 261 Not applicable1 Critical1 not blocked1 No public exploit1

Q3 23Q1 24Q3 24Q1 25Q3 25Q1 26Q3 26

21 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.

CVE	Severity	Published▾	Status	Exploitation	Description
CVE-2026-75803	Critical	2026-08-25	Not applicable	No public exploit	Issue summary: ChaCha20-Poly1305 and AES-OCB decryption with an empty ciphertext can report success without verifying the supplied authentication tag when the operation is finalized by calling the EVP_Cipher() function. Impact summary: Applications calling EVP_Cipher() on an empty ciphertext and expecting the call to check the AEAD tag may accept forged messages. CWE: CWE-354 (Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value) Description: The EVP_Cipher() API call for AEAD ciphers behaves like a one shot encryption and decryption call. It also verifies the AEAD tag after the decryption operation. However for AES-OCB and ChaCha20-Poly1305 ciphers it skipped the AEAD tag verification when an empty ciphertext was passed to the function. The callers of this function might believe that a successful return indicates a valid AEAD tag for these ciphers, even when that has not truly been validated in this case. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected algorithms are not FIPS approved and thus not implemented in the FIPS module.
CVE-2026-26007	High	2026-02-10	Not applicable	No public exploit	cryptography is a package designed to expose cryptographic primitives and recipes to Python developers. Prior to 46.0.5, the public_key_from_numbers (or EllipticCurvePublicNumbers.public_key()), EllipticCurvePublicNumbers.public_key(), load_der_public_key() and load_pem_public_key() functions do not verify that the point belongs to the expected prime-order subgroup of the curve. This missing validation allows an attacker to provide a public key point P from a small-order subgroup. This can lead to security issues in various situations, such as the most commonly used signature verification (ECDSA) and shared key negotiation (ECDH). When the victim computes the shared secret as S = [victim_private_key]P via ECDH, this leaks information about victim_private_key mod (small_subgroup_order). For curves with cofactor > 1, this reveals the least significant bits of the private key. When these weak public keys are used in ECDSA , it's easy to forge signatures on the small subgroup. Only SECT curves are impacted by this. This vulnerability is fixed in 46.0.5.
CVE-2025-13837	Low	2025-12-01	Not applicable	No public exploit	When loading a plist file, the plistlib module reads data in size specified by the file itself, meaning a malicious file can cause OOM and DoS issues
CVE-2025-13836	Medium	2025-12-01	Not applicable	No public exploit	When reading an HTTP response from a server, if no read amount is specified, the default behavior will be to use Content-Length. This allows a malicious server to cause the client to read large amounts of data into memory, potentially causing OOM or other DoS.
CVE-2025-6075	Low	2025-10-31	Not applicable	No public exploit	If the value passed to os.path.expandvars() is user-controlled a performance degradation is possible when expanding environment variables.
CVE-2025-8291	Medium	2025-10-07	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	The 'zipfile' module would not check the validity of the ZIP64 End of Central Directory (EOCD) Locator record offset value would not be used to locate the ZIP64 EOCD record, instead the ZIP64 EOCD record would be assumed to be the previous record in the ZIP archive. This could be abused to create ZIP archives that are handled differently by the 'zipfile' module compared to other ZIP implementations. Remediation maintains this behavior, but checks that the offset specified in the ZIP64 EOCD Locator record matches the expected value.
CVE-2025-8869	Medium	2025-09-24	Not applicable	No public exploit	When extracting a tar archive pip may not check symbolic links point into the extraction directory if the tarfile module doesn't implement PEP 706. Note that upgrading pip to a "fixed" version for this vulnerability doesn't fix all known vulnerabilities that are remediated by using a Python version that implements PEP 706. Note that this is a vulnerability in pip's fallback implementation of tar extraction for Python versions that don't implement PEP 706 and therefore are not secure to all vulnerabilities in the Python 'tarfile' module. If you're using a Python version that implements PEP 706 then pip doesn't use the "vulnerable" fallback code. Mitigations include upgrading to a version of pip that includes the fix, upgrading to a Python version that implements PEP 706 (Python >=3.9.17, >=3.10.12, >=3.11.4, or >=3.12), applying the linked patch, or inspecting source distributions (sdists) before installation as is already a best-practice.
CVE-2025-8194	High	2025-07-28	Not applicable	No public exploit	There is a defect in the CPython “tarfile” module affecting the “TarFile” extraction and entry enumeration APIs. The tar implementation would process tar archives with negative offsets without error, resulting in an infinite loop and deadlock during the parsing of maliciously crafted tar archives. This vulnerability can be mitigated by including the following patch after importing the “tarfile” module: https://gist.github.com/sethmlarson/1716ac5b82b73dbcbf23ad2eff8b33e1
CVE-2025-6069	Medium	2025-06-17	Not applicable	No public exploit	The html.parser.HTMLParser class had worse-case quadratic complexity when processing certain crafted malformed inputs potentially leading to amplified denial-of-service.
CVE-2025-4517	Critical	2025-06-03	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	Allows arbitrary filesystem writes outside the extraction directory during extraction with filter="data". You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.
CVE-2025-4435	High	2025-06-03	Not applicable	No public exploit	When using a TarFile.errorlevel = 0 and extracting with a filter the documented behavior is that any filtered members would be skipped and not extracted. However the actual behavior of TarFile.errorlevel = 0 in affected versions is that the member would still be extracted and not skipped.
CVE-2025-4330	High	2025-06-03	Not applicable	No public exploit	Allows the extraction filter to be ignored, allowing symlink targets to point outside the destination directory, and the modification of some file metadata. You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.
CVE-2025-4138	High	2025-06-03	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	Allows the extraction filter to be ignored, allowing symlink targets to point outside the destination directory, and the modification of some file metadata. You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.
CVE-2024-12718	Medium	2025-06-03	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	Allows modifying some file metadata (e.g. last modified) with filter="data" or file permissions (chmod) with filter="tar" of files outside the extraction directory. You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Only Python versions 3.12 or later are affected by these vulnerabilities, earlier versions don't include the extraction filter feature. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.
CVE-2025-1795	Low	2025-02-28	Not applicable	No public exploit	During an address list folding when a separating comma ends up on a folded line and that line is to be unicode-encoded then the separator itself is also unicode-encoded. Expected behavior is that the separating comma remains a plan comma. This can result in the address header being misinterpreted by some mail servers.
CVE-2024-12254	High	2024-12-06	Not applicable	No public exploit	Starting in Python 3.12.0, the asyncio._SelectorSocketTransport.writelines() method would not "pause" writing and signal to the Protocol to drain the buffer to the wire once the write buffer reached the "high-water mark". Because of this, Protocols would not periodically drain the write buffer potentially leading to memory exhaustion. This vulnerability likely impacts a small number of users, you must be using Python 3.12.0 or later, on macOS or Linux, using the asyncio module with protocols, and using .writelines() method which had new zero-copy-on-write behavior in Python 3.12.0 and later. If not all of these factors are true then your usage of Python is unaffected.
CVE-2024-8088	High	2024-08-22	Not applicable	No public exploit	There is a HIGH severity vulnerability affecting the CPython "zipfile" module affecting "zipfile.Path". Note that the more common API "zipfile.ZipFile" class is unaffected. When iterating over names of entries in a zip archive (for example, methods of "zipfile.Path" like "namelist()", "iterdir()", etc) the process can be put into an infinite loop with a maliciously crafted zip archive. This defect applies when reading only metadata or extracting the contents of the zip archive. Programs that are not handling user-controlled zip archives are not affected.
CVE-2024-6923	Medium	2024-08-01	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	There is a MEDIUM severity vulnerability affecting CPython. The email module didn’t properly quote newlines for email headers when serializing an email message allowing for header injection when an email is serialized.
CVE-2023-40217	Medium	2023-08-25	Not applicable	No public exploit	An issue was discovered in Python before 3.8.18, 3.9.x before 3.9.18, 3.10.x before 3.10.13, and 3.11.x before 3.11.5. It primarily affects servers (such as HTTP servers) that use TLS client authentication. If a TLS server-side socket is created, receives data into the socket buffer, and then is closed quickly, there is a brief window where the SSLSocket instance will detect the socket as "not connected" and won't initiate a handshake, but buffered data will still be readable from the socket buffer. This data will not be authenticated if the server-side TLS peer is expecting client certificate authentication, and is indistinguishable from valid TLS stream data. Data is limited in size to the amount that will fit in the buffer. (The TLS connection cannot directly be used for data exfiltration because the vulnerable code path requires that the connection be closed on initialization of the SSLSocket.)
CVE-2023-41105	High	2023-08-23	Not applicable	No public exploit	An issue was discovered in Python 3.11 through 3.11.4. If a path containing '\0' bytes is passed to os.path.normpath(), the path will be truncated unexpectedly at the first '\0' byte. There are plausible cases in which an application would have rejected a filename for security reasons in Python 3.10.x or earlier, but that filename is no longer rejected in Python 3.11.x.
CVE-2023-36632	High	2023-06-25	Not applicable	Proof of concept only	The legacy email.utils.parseaddr function in Python through 3.11.4 allows attackers to trigger "RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded while calling a Python object" via a crafted argument. This argument is plausibly an untrusted value from an application's input data that was supposed to contain a name and an e-mail address. NOTE: email.utils.parseaddr is categorized as a Legacy API in the documentation of the Python email package. Applications should instead use the email.parser.BytesParser or email.parser.Parser class. NOTE: the vendor's perspective is that this is neither a vulnerability nor a bug. The email package is intended to have size limits and to throw an exception when limits are exceeded; they were exceeded by the example demonstration code.

CVE

Severity

Published▾

Status

Exploitation

Description

CVE-2026-75803

Critical

2026-08-25

Not applicable

No public exploit

Issue summary: ChaCha20-Poly1305 and AES-OCB decryption with an empty ciphertext can report success without verifying the supplied authentication tag when the operation is finalized by calling the EVP_Cipher() function. Impact summary: Applications calling EVP_Cipher() on an empty ciphertext and expecting the call to check the AEAD tag may accept forged messages. CWE: CWE-354 (Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value) Description: The EVP_Cipher() API call for AEAD ciphers behaves like a one shot encryption and decryption call. It also verifies the AEAD tag after the decryption operation. However for AES-OCB and ChaCha20-Poly1305 ciphers it skipped the AEAD tag verification when an empty ciphertext was passed to the function. The callers of this function might believe that a successful return indicates a valid AEAD tag for these ciphers, even when that has not truly been validated in this case. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected algorithms are not FIPS approved and thus not implemented in the FIPS module.

CVE-2026-26007

High

2026-02-10

Not applicable

No public exploit

cryptography is a package designed to expose cryptographic primitives and recipes to Python developers. Prior to 46.0.5, the public_key_from_numbers (or EllipticCurvePublicNumbers.public_key()), EllipticCurvePublicNumbers.public_key(), load_der_public_key() and load_pem_public_key() functions do not verify that the point belongs to the expected prime-order subgroup of the curve. This missing validation allows an attacker to provide a public key point P from a small-order subgroup. This can lead to security issues in various situations, such as the most commonly used signature verification (ECDSA) and shared key negotiation (ECDH). When the victim computes the shared secret as S = [victim_private_key]P via ECDH, this leaks information about victim_private_key mod (small_subgroup_order). For curves with cofactor > 1, this reveals the least significant bits of the private key. When these weak public keys are used in ECDSA , it's easy to forge signatures on the small subgroup. Only SECT curves are impacted by this. This vulnerability is fixed in 46.0.5.

CVE-2025-13837

Low

2025-12-01

Not applicable

No public exploit

When loading a plist file, the plistlib module reads data in size specified by the file itself, meaning a malicious file can cause OOM and DoS issues

CVE-2025-13836

Medium

2025-12-01

Not applicable

No public exploit

When reading an HTTP response from a server, if no read amount is specified, the default behavior will be to use Content-Length. This allows a malicious server to cause the client to read large amounts of data into memory, potentially causing OOM or other DoS.

CVE-2025-6075

Low

2025-10-31

Not applicable

No public exploit

If the value passed to os.path.expandvars() is user-controlled a performance degradation is possible when expanding environment variables.

CVE-2025-8291

Medium

2025-10-07

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

The 'zipfile' module would not check the validity of the ZIP64 End of Central Directory (EOCD) Locator record offset value would not be used to locate the ZIP64 EOCD record, instead the ZIP64 EOCD record would be assumed to be the previous record in the ZIP archive. This could be abused to create ZIP archives that are handled differently by the 'zipfile' module compared to other ZIP implementations. Remediation maintains this behavior, but checks that the offset specified in the ZIP64 EOCD Locator record matches the expected value.

CVE-2025-8869

Medium

2025-09-24

Not applicable

No public exploit

When extracting a tar archive pip may not check symbolic links point into the extraction directory if the tarfile module doesn't implement PEP 706. Note that upgrading pip to a "fixed" version for this vulnerability doesn't fix all known vulnerabilities that are remediated by using a Python version that implements PEP 706. Note that this is a vulnerability in pip's fallback implementation of tar extraction for Python versions that don't implement PEP 706 and therefore are not secure to all vulnerabilities in the Python 'tarfile' module. If you're using a Python version that implements PEP 706 then pip doesn't use the "vulnerable" fallback code. Mitigations include upgrading to a version of pip that includes the fix, upgrading to a Python version that implements PEP 706 (Python >=3.9.17, >=3.10.12, >=3.11.4, or >=3.12), applying the linked patch, or inspecting source distributions (sdists) before installation as is already a best-practice.

CVE-2025-8194

High

2025-07-28

Not applicable

No public exploit

There is a defect in the CPython “tarfile” module affecting the “TarFile” extraction and entry enumeration APIs. The tar implementation would process tar archives with negative offsets without error, resulting in an infinite loop and deadlock during the parsing of maliciously crafted tar archives. This vulnerability can be mitigated by including the following patch after importing the “tarfile” module: https://gist.github.com/sethmlarson/1716ac5b82b73dbcbf23ad2eff8b33e1

CVE-2025-6069

Medium

2025-06-17

Not applicable

No public exploit

The html.parser.HTMLParser class had worse-case quadratic complexity when processing certain crafted malformed inputs potentially leading to amplified denial-of-service.

CVE-2025-4517

Critical

2025-06-03

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

Allows arbitrary filesystem writes outside the extraction directory during extraction with filter="data". You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.

CVE-2025-4435

High

2025-06-03

Not applicable

No public exploit

When using a TarFile.errorlevel = 0 and extracting with a filter the documented behavior is that any filtered members would be skipped and not extracted. However the actual behavior of TarFile.errorlevel = 0 in affected versions is that the member would still be extracted and not skipped.

CVE-2025-4330

High

2025-06-03

Not applicable

No public exploit

Allows the extraction filter to be ignored, allowing symlink targets to point outside the destination directory, and the modification of some file metadata. You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.

CVE-2025-4138

High

2025-06-03

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

CVE-2024-12718

Medium

2025-06-03

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

Allows modifying some file metadata (e.g. last modified) with filter="data" or file permissions (chmod) with filter="tar" of files outside the extraction directory. You are affected by this vulnerability if using the tarfile module to extract untrusted tar archives using TarFile.extractall() or TarFile.extract() using the filter= parameter with a value of "data" or "tar". See the tarfile extraction filters documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/tarfile.html#tarfile-extraction-filter for more information. Only Python versions 3.12 or later are affected by these vulnerabilities, earlier versions don't include the extraction filter feature. Note that for Python 3.14 or later the default value of filter= changed from "no filtering" to `"data", so if you are relying on this new default behavior then your usage is also affected. Note that none of these vulnerabilities significantly affect the installation of source distributions which are tar archives as source distributions already allow arbitrary code execution during the build process. However when evaluating source distributions it's important to avoid installing source distributions with suspicious links.

CVE-2025-1795

Low

2025-02-28

Not applicable

No public exploit

During an address list folding when a separating comma ends up on a folded line and that line is to be unicode-encoded then the separator itself is also unicode-encoded. Expected behavior is that the separating comma remains a plan comma. This can result in the address header being misinterpreted by some mail servers.

CVE-2024-12254

High

2024-12-06

Not applicable

No public exploit

Starting in Python 3.12.0, the asyncio._SelectorSocketTransport.writelines() method would not "pause" writing and signal to the Protocol to drain the buffer to the wire once the write buffer reached the "high-water mark". Because of this, Protocols would not periodically drain the write buffer potentially leading to memory exhaustion. This vulnerability likely impacts a small number of users, you must be using Python 3.12.0 or later, on macOS or Linux, using the asyncio module with protocols, and using .writelines() method which had new zero-copy-on-write behavior in Python 3.12.0 and later. If not all of these factors are true then your usage of Python is unaffected.

CVE-2024-8088

High

2024-08-22

Not applicable

No public exploit

There is a HIGH severity vulnerability affecting the CPython "zipfile" module affecting "zipfile.Path". Note that the more common API "zipfile.ZipFile" class is unaffected. When iterating over names of entries in a zip archive (for example, methods of "zipfile.Path" like "namelist()", "iterdir()", etc) the process can be put into an infinite loop with a maliciously crafted zip archive. This defect applies when reading only metadata or extracting the contents of the zip archive. Programs that are not handling user-controlled zip archives are not affected.

CVE-2024-6923

Medium

2024-08-01

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

There is a MEDIUM severity vulnerability affecting CPython. The email module didn’t properly quote newlines for email headers when serializing an email message allowing for header injection when an email is serialized.

CVE-2023-40217

Medium

2023-08-25

Not applicable

No public exploit

An issue was discovered in Python before 3.8.18, 3.9.x before 3.9.18, 3.10.x before 3.10.13, and 3.11.x before 3.11.5. It primarily affects servers (such as HTTP servers) that use TLS client authentication. If a TLS server-side socket is created, receives data into the socket buffer, and then is closed quickly, there is a brief window where the SSLSocket instance will detect the socket as "not connected" and won't initiate a handshake, but buffered data will still be readable from the socket buffer. This data will not be authenticated if the server-side TLS peer is expecting client certificate authentication, and is indistinguishable from valid TLS stream data. Data is limited in size to the amount that will fit in the buffer. (The TLS connection cannot directly be used for data exfiltration because the vulnerable code path requires that the connection be closed on initialization of the SSLSocket.)

CVE-2023-41105

High

2023-08-23

Not applicable

No public exploit

An issue was discovered in Python 3.11 through 3.11.4. If a path containing '\0' bytes is passed to os.path.normpath(), the path will be truncated unexpectedly at the first '\0' byte. There are plausible cases in which an application would have rejected a filename for security reasons in Python 3.10.x or earlier, but that filename is no longer rejected in Python 3.11.x.

CVE-2023-36632

High

2023-06-25

Not applicable

Proof of concept only

The legacy email.utils.parseaddr function in Python through 3.11.4 allows attackers to trigger "RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded while calling a Python object" via a crafted argument. This argument is plausibly an untrusted value from an application's input data that was supposed to contain a name and an e-mail address. NOTE: email.utils.parseaddr is categorized as a Legacy API in the documentation of the Python email package. Applications should instead use the email.parser.BytesParser or email.parser.Parser class. NOTE: the vendor's perspective is that this is neither a vulnerability nor a bug. The email package is intended to have size limits and to throw an exception when limits are exceeded; they were exceeded by the example demonstration code.