CVE-2026-49214
Guzzlephp Psr-7 ≤ 2.10.2
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-49214 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Guzzlephp Psr-7. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 9th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and 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-2026-36240
Vulnerability Data
guzzlehttp/psr7 is a PSR-7 HTTP message library implementation in PHP. Versions prior to 2.10.2 did not reject ASCII control characters, whitespace, or DEL in first-party URI host components. A vulnerable flow is: First, an application accepts a user-controlled URL. Second,…
more
the URL is used to construct a PSR-7 `Uri` or `Request`. Third, the host component contains CRLF or another header-unsafe character. Fourth, the host is copied into the PSR-7 `Host` header when no explicit `Host` header is provided. Finally, the request is serialized or sent by an HTTP client that does not independently reject the malformed host. In that flow, an attacker can cause the serialized request to contain additional attacker-controlled header lines. For example, a host containing `"\r\nX-Injected: yes"` can cause the generated `Host` header to span multiple HTTP header lines. Applications are affected when they use user-controlled URLs for outbound HTTP requests, URL forwarding, proxying, crawling, webhook delivery, or similar request-dispatch flows. In deployments involving HTTP/1.1 connection reuse, proxies, gateways, or load balancers, this malformed request may also contribute to request smuggling or cache poisoning, depending on how downstream components parse the request. The issue is patched in `2.10.2` and later. `1.x` is end-of-life and will not receive a patch. As a workaround, validate and reject all untrusted URI strings before constructing PSR-7 `Uri` or `Request` instances. Reject input containing ASCII control characters, whitespace, or DEL, including CRLF, tab, space, NUL, or DEL characters. Applications that forward requests should also ensure the final HTTP client or serializer rejects invalid URI and header data before writing requests to the network.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V3.4.2V4.1.3V1.3.6V4.2.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Output filtering can neutralize CRLF sequences before they reach HTTP response headers.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
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 and enforce input validation during development.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Logging of HTTP traffic can record header-splitting attempts, aiding detection and forensics.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20