CVE Intelligence
High exploit reference

CVE-2022-45061 — An issue was discovered in Python before 3.11.1. An unnecessary quadratic algorithm exists in one...

An issue was discovered in Python before 3.11.1. An unnecessary quadratic algorithm exists in one path when processing some inputs to the IDNA (RFC 3490) decoder, such that a crafted, unreasonably long name being presented to the decoder could lead to a CPU denial of service. Hostnames are often supplied by remote servers that could be controlled by a malicious actor; in such a scenario, they could trigger excessive CPU consumption on the client attempting to make use of an attacker-supplied supposed hostname. For example, the attack payload could be placed in the Location header of an HTTP response with status code 302. A fix is planned in 3.11.1, 3.10.9, 3.9.16, 3.8.16, and 3.7.16.

Published Nov 9, 2022 · Updated Oct 14, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, GitHub Security Advisories · CNA: mitre

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 2.7% (30-day exploitation probability)+13
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
  • Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
2.65%
ahead of 85% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Fedoraproject
Fedora and 8 more
CVSS base
7.5
High · 4 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
Yes
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Fedoraproject Fedora, Netapp Active Iq Unified Manager, Netapp Bootstrap Os…).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Fedoraproject Fedora version 36version 37version 35 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Active Iq Unified Manager versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Bootstrap Os versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp E-series Performance Analyzer versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Element Software versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Hci versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Management Services For Element Software versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Ontap Select Deploy Administration Utility versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Python Python version 3.11.0-alpha7≤ 3.7.15version 3.11.0-rc2version 3.11.0-rc1version 3.11.0-beta5version 3.11.0-beta4version 3.11.0-beta3version 3.11.0-beta2
and 11 more version 3.11.0-beta1≥ 3.8.0 and ≤ 3.8.15version 3.11.0-alpha6version 3.11.0-alpha5version 3.11.0-alpha4version 3.11.0-alpha3version 3.11.0-alpha2version 3.11.0-alpha1version 3.11.0≥ 3.10.0 and ≤ 3.10.8≥ 3.9.0 and ≤ 3.9.15
Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High — — GitHub, Inc. via GitHub Security Advisories
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High — — CISA-ADP via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-407

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 14, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 14, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Affected products added · python/python, fedoraproject/fedora, netapp/active iq unified manager, netapp/e-series performance analyzer, netapp/elem
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 7.5
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 14, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • 2022
  • CVE published
    Nov 9, 2022 · mitre

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 2× References added · Oct 14, 2026 – Oct 14, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 14, 2026 – Oct 14, 2026

References

99 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Fedoraproject
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-407
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-15308 Incremental HTMLParser feed() allows CPU-exhaustion DoS via repeated unterminated markup declarations Jul 9, 2026
  • CVE-2026-4360 Tarfile.extract() doesn't fully respect filter parameter Jun 30, 2026
  • CVE-2026-0864 Configuration Injection via Carriage Return (\r) in write() method Jun 23, 2026
  • CVE-2026-54231 Abrt: unsanitized systemd journal content written to dump directory files enables content injection Jun 13, 2026
  • CVE-2026-54230 Abrt: event handler scripts follow symlinks when writing output files, allowing arbitrary file overwrites Jun 13, 2026
  • CVE-2026-7210 The expat and elementtree parsers use insufficient entropy for XML hash-flooding protection May 11, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2022-45061 is "An issue was discovered in Python before 3.11.1. An unnecessary quadratic algorithm exists in one...", rated High. It affects Fedora (Fedoraproject); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 2.65% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.