Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-53538

Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart ≤ 0.0.30

Published
22 June 2026
Modified
26 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 3.7
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0018 7th percentile
Risk Priority 31 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-53538 is a low-severity Interpretation Conflict (CWE-436) vulnerability in Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart. Its CVSS base score is 3.7 (Low).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 7th 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

No EU or UK CSIRT advisories indexed for this CVE.

Vulnerability Data

Python-Multipart is a streaming multipart parser for Python. Prior to 0.0.30, QuerystringParser treated ; as a field separator in application/x-www-form-urlencoded bodies, in addition to &. The WHATWG URL standard, modern browsers, and Python's urllib.parse (since the CVE-2021-23336 fix) treat only…

more

& as a separator. This creates a parser differential: the same bytes are tokenized into different fields than a WHATWG compliant intermediary would produce, allowing an attacker to smuggle extra form fields past an upstream body inspecting component. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.0.30.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1557 Adversary-in-the-Middle Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to position themselves between two or more networked devices using an adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) technique to support follow-on behaviors such as [Network Sniffing](https://attack.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-53537Same product: Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart
CVE-2026-24486Same product: Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart
CVE-2026-53540Same product: Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart
CVE-2026-40347Same product: Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart
CVE-2026-53539Same product: Fastapiexpert Python-Multipart
CVE-2026-32065Shared CWE-436
CVE-2023-30536Shared CWE-436
CVE-2024-38428Shared CWE-436
CVE-2024-20293Shared CWE-436
CVE-2023-36456Shared CWE-436

Affected Assets

fastapiexpert
python-multipart
≤ 0.0.30

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V4.1.3
  • V4.2.4
  • V1.5.3
  • V4.1.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover cases where two products interpret the same inputs or state transitions differently.

Strict, consistently applied input validation reduces the chance that one product will accept data the other product rejects or interprets differently.

Applying security engineering principles during design can require unambiguous protocol and data-format specifications that eliminate divergent interpretations between products.

Boundary protection at external interfaces can enforce consistent HTTP request/response parsing rules between intermediaries and endpoints.

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.

PR.PS-01 mostly match
prevents

Configuration management can enforce uniform HTTP parsing rules across intermediaries, directly mitigating inconsistent interpretation.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly reduce the chance of introducing parser or state-machine inconsistencies.

DE.AE-03 partial match
prevents

Correlating logs from multiple products can surface discrepancies caused by interpretation conflicts.

DE.CM-01 partial match
prevents

Network monitoring can detect smuggling attempts via anomalous HTTP traffic or logs, while eliminating the inconsistency directly aids detection of such events.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of software behavior can detect adverse outcomes stemming from differing interpretations.

GV.SC-07 partial match
prevents

Supplier risk assessments can identify products whose differing interpretations create systemic exposure.

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.

finds

Security testing can detect and correct cases where one component misinterprets another’s state or messages.

degrades

Network security controls can enforce consistent HTTP parsing and proxy behavior that mitigates request smuggling.

degrades

Secure network services include hardening proxies and gateways against inconsistent HTTP interpretation.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle can require consistent interface contracts and canonicalization rules that reduce interpretation conflicts between components.

prevents

Explicit application security requirements can mandate unambiguous protocol and data-format specifications that prevent divergent interpretations.

prevents

Secure architecture principles include well-defined component boundaries and shared data models that limit conflicting state perceptions.

References