CVE-2026-94194 — Mint HTTP/1 client applies chunked framing when chunked is not the final transfer coding, enabling response smuggling through intermediaries
Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') vulnerability in elixir-mint mint allows a malicious HTTP/1 server to desynchronize an intermediary and the Mint client on a pooled connection, poisoning the responses to subsequent requests that share the connection. message_body/1 in lib/mint/http1.ex selects chunked framing when chunked is the first coding listed in a response's Transfer-Encoding fields. RFC 9112 section 6.3 applies chunked framing only when chunked is the final coding, and otherwise reads the body until the server closes the connection. For a response such as Transfer-Encoding: chunked, gzip, an intermediary that follows the RFC treats every byte up to the close as the body, while Mint ends the body at the zero-length chunk and parses the remaining bytes as the response to the next request on the connection. Mint also keeps the connection open after an HTTP/1.0 response, final or 1xx, that carries Transfer-Encoding and Connection: keep-alive. RFC 9112 section 6.1 requires treating the framing of such a message as faulty and closing the connection after it, so bytes after its chunked body are parsed as the response to the next request in the same way. This issue affects mint: from 0.1.0 before 1.10.2.
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
- 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 matching the vulnerability class (injection), 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 < 1.10.2≥ 60089586ec7adc9fddb09f69a2f5919ba9ac7f33 | 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:L/VI:L/VA:N/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).
- Look for parameters with command/query metacharacters and unexpected child processes of the service.
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
6 on the record
- github.com/elixir-mint/mint/commit/2ec8b696b5475ecbdaa87c0098957bca339e17c0
- github.com/elixir-mint/mint/commit/8d1bbcfa566a8c1dc23d33f40d550c28250ac7b9
- osv.dev/vulnerability/EEF-CVE-2026-94194
- cna.erlef.org/cves/CVE-2026-94194.html
- github.com/elixir-mint/mint/security/advisories/GHSA-gvrc-75rc-7gj9
- github.com/elixir-mint/mint/commit/60089586ec7adc9fddb09f69a2f5919ba9ac7f33
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- 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
- Medium CVE-2026-82729 Quadratic chunk-size parsing in Mint.HTTP1.Parse allows CPU-exhaustion DoS Sep 4, 2026
- 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 FIRST EPSS score.
- 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-2026-94194 is "Mint HTTP/1 client applies chunked framing when chunked is not the final transfer coding, enabling response smuggling through intermediaries", 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. 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.