Response-header injection via unsanitized cookie strings
Published May 11, 2026 · Updated May 11, 2026
HTTP response splitting in Microdot before 2.6.1 allows context-dependent attackers to inject response headers through cookie data. Response.set_cookie() concatenates untrusted cookie, value, path, and domain strings into a Set-Cookie header without rejecting carriage returns or line feeds. Reachability requires an already infiltrated client and application code that stores its supplied data in a cookie; injected headers affect only responses to that client.
Summary
What happened
HTTP response splitting in Microdot before 2.6.1 allows context-dependent attackers to inject response headers through cookie data. Response.set_cookie() concatenates untrusted cookie, value, path, and domain strings into a Set-Cookie header without rejecting carriage returns or line feeds. Reachability requires an already infiltrated client and application code that stores its supplied data in a cookie; injected headers affect only responses to that client.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2026-42874
- Published
- May 11, 2026
- Updated
- May 11, 2026
- Vendor
- Miguel Grinberg
- Product
- Microdot
- Classifications
- CWE-113
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- May 11, 2026CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- May 11, 2026Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=< 2.6.1
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
No public exploit references are available in this record.
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo