CVE-2026-48861 — CRLF injection in HTTP/1 request line via unvalidated method in Mint
Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection') vulnerability in elixir-mint Mint allows HTTP Request Splitting and HTTP Request Smuggling. In lib/mint/http1/request.ex, the encode_request_line/2 function splices the caller-supplied method and target arguments directly into the HTTP/1 request line without any character validation: [method, ?\s, target, " HTTP/1.1\r\n"]. An application that forwards attacker-controlled input as the HTTP method or target to Mint.HTTP.request/5 is therefore exposed to request-line CRLF injection: the attacker can terminate the request line early, inject arbitrary headers, and smuggle an entirely separate pipelined HTTP request onto the same TCP connection. Mint 1.7.0 introduced validate_request_target/2, which rejects CRLF and other control characters in the target by default and closes the path/query vector unless the caller opts out via skip_target_validation: true. The method field remains unvalidated, so the method-based injection is exploitable under the default Mint configuration on all versions. This issue affects mint: from 0.1.0 before 1.9.0.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+2
- CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
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.
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.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.
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.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Elixir-mint Mint).
- No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elixir-mint | Mint | ≥ 0.1.0 and < 1.9.0≥ 8db1acff30b6a9433762c18b1e1f891b8c1f74f7 and < fad091454cbb7449b19edb8e1fee12ca7cf28c3a | Vulnerable | CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 | CVSS 4.0 | Low | — | — | 6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 2.1 | CVSS 4.0 | Low | — | — | EEF via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/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:X (score shown at the top: 6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
EPSS over time FIRST
Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.22%
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · elixir-mint/mint
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 2.1
- Source status changed · → Deferred
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
4 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Medium CVE-2026-59249 Sign-tolerant HTTP/1 chunk-size parser in Mint enables response smuggling against strict intermediaries on pooled connections Jul 16, 2026
- High CVE-2026-58229 Unbounded HTTP/1 response-header and chunked-trailer accumulation in Mint causes memory-exhaustion DoS Jul 14, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-59246 Zero-length HTTP/2 CONTINUATION frames bypass Mint's header-block byte-size cap and exhaust client memory Jul 14, 2026
- High CVE-2026-56810 mint buffers an entire chunked response chunk in memory in Mint.HTTP1.decode_body/5 Jul 6, 2026
- High CVE-2026-48862 Unbounded conn.streams growth in Mint HTTP/2 client via unenforced PUSH_PROMISE concurrency Jun 2, 2026
- High CVE-2026-49754 HTTP/2 CONTINUATION flood in Mint client via unbounded header-block accumulation Jun 2, 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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
- 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-2026-48861 is "CRLF injection in HTTP/1 request line via unvalidated method in Mint", rated Low. It affects Mint (Elixir-mint); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 2.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.22% 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.