CVE-2023-26142
Crowcpp Crow 1.0\+5
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-26142 is a medium-severity HTTP Request/Response Splitting (CWE-113) vulnerability in Crowcpp Crow. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Protocol or Service Impersonation (T1001.003); ranked at the 43th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-29980
Vulnerability Data
All versions of the package crow are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting when untrusted user input is used to build header values. Header values are not properly sanitized against CRLF Injection in the set_header and add_header functions. An attacker can…
more
add the \r\n (carriage return line feeds) characters to end the HTTP response headers and inject malicious content.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.4.2V4.1.3V1.3.6V4.2.3
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Developer assessments and testing (including injection-focused techniques) identify improper neutralization of special elements, and the verifiable flaw remediation corrects them pre-deployment.
Identifies indicators of injection attacks (command, SQL, LDAP, etc.) via anomaly and attack monitoring.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input sanitization and header handling that prevent CRLF injection.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training that reach HTTP header sanitization and therefore stop most (but not all) instances of CRLF injection from reaching production; a bounded remainder exists in implementation gaps, outsourced development without full assurance, and post-deployment changes.
A.8.26 explicitly lists resilience against SQL injections and input validation as application security requirements (items d and j), which directly addresses improper neutralization of special sequences like CRLF in HTTP headers; however, this is only one slice of a broad requirements-identification control whose coverage of other injection vectors, output handling, and non-web contexts leaves a bounded remainder.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-74, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.