CVE-2026-12143
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-12143 is a high-severity CRLF Injection (CWE-93) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 44th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-36524
Vulnerability Data
form-data is a library for creating readable multipart/form-data streams. In versions through 4.0.5, the `field` argument to `FormData#append` and the `filename` option are concatenated verbatim into the `Content-Disposition` header without escaping carriage return (CR), line feed (LF), or double-quote (")…
more
characters. An application that passes attacker-controlled data as a field name or filename (for example, an API gateway that turns JSON object keys into multipart field names) allows the attacker to terminate the header line and inject additional headers, or to smuggle entire additional multipart parts, into the request the application forwards to a backend. This can let the attacker add or override form fields (e.g. set `is_admin=true`) seen by the downstream parser. This is an instance of CWE-93 (CRLF injection). The fix escapes CR, LF, and `"` as `%0D`, `%0A`, and `%22` in field names and filenames, matching the serialization browsers use per the WHATWG HTML multipart/form-data encoding algorithm. Exploitation requires the consuming application to use untrusted input as a field name or filename; applications that use only fixed/trusted field names are not affected. Fixed in 2.5.6, 3.0.5, and 4.0.6.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V4.2.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly stops untrusted data containing CRLF sequences from reaching the component that treats CRLF as a delimiter.
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 neutralization and validation to block 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.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevents CRLF injection.
Application security requirements include rules for neutralizing special characters such as CRLF in inputs.
Secure architecture principles encourage safe handling of untrusted data but do not prescribe specific CRLF controls.
Secure coding standards explicitly require neutralization of CRLF sequences, fully addressing this weakness.
Security testing can detect CRLF flaws but does not itself implement the neutralization.