CVE-2026-82729 — Quadratic chunk-size parsing in Mint.HTTP1.Parse allows CPU-exhaustion DoS
Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity vulnerability in elixir-mint mint allows a remote HTTP server to exhaust CPU on the client host and cause a denial of service. parse_hex_prefix/2 in lib/mint/http1/parse.ex folds each hex digit of a chunked response's chunk-size field into an arbitrary-precision accumulator with acc * 16 + digit and imposes no limit on the digit count. Because the accumulator grows without bound, the multiplication is not constant time and one pass over N digits costs O(N squared). handle_data/2 prepends conn.buffer and re-parses from the start on every socket message, so a server that dribbles the digits out in small packets makes the client pay that cost repeatedly. A run of roughly 512,000 hex digits costs over ten seconds of CPU in a single pass, measured on stock defaults. The parser reaches this state after a valid status line and a complete, valid header section, so an intermediary inspecting only headers sees an ordinary 200 response. This issue affects mint: from 1.9.3 before 1.10.0.
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 0.5% (30-day exploitation probability)+6
- Technical severity (medium)+3
- 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).
- The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
- 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 | ≥ 1.9.3 and < 1.10.0≥ fc7d16538db7e40b56ed489f08683225cb0197fa and < bd2a4e7513594997c140cfef9fe0e968712fb588 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.3 | CVSS 4.0 | Medium | — | — | 6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 6.3 | CVSS 4.0 | Medium | — | — | EEF via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/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.
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).
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · elixir-mint/mint
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 6.3
- 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 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
4 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Medium CVE-2026-94194 Mint HTTP/1 client applies chunked framing when chunked is not the final transfer coding, enabling response smuggling through intermediaries 17d
- High CVE-2026-91043 HPACK-indexed cookie fields in Mint HTTP/2 responses bypass max_header_list_size and exhaust client memory 17d
- Medium CVE-2026-92103 Mint HTTP/2 client buffers oversized frames up to 16 MiB before enforcing max_frame_size 17d
- Medium CVE-2026-82672 Unvalidated chunk-size line tail in Mint HTTP/1 client enables response smuggling against strict intermediaries on pooled connections 26d
- High CVE-2026-82728 Unbounded HTTP/1 status-line and chunk-extension buffering in Mint causes memory-exhaustion DoS Sep 4, 2026
- 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
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-2026-82729 is "Quadratic chunk-size parsing in Mint.HTTP1.Parse allows CPU-exhaustion DoS", rated Medium. It affects Mint (Elixir-mint); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.3 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.52% 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.