Plug.Parsers.MULTIPART, the multipart request-body parser used to handle file uploads and multipart forms, does not enforce its :length budget against all consumed resources, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause denial of service. The parser charges the :length limit only for part body bytes; part header bytes are never counted, and a part with an empty body costs zero.
Because every part whose Content-Disposition carries a non-empty filename creates a fresh temporary file (via Plug.Upload) and retains a Plug.Upload struct for the duration of the request, an attacker can send a single request composed of many empty-body file parts. Such a request stays well under the configured :length limit (8,000,000 bytes by default) while creating one temporary file per part, leading to inode and disk exhaustion and unbounded memory growth. Any application using Plug.Parsers with the :multipart parser is affected, and no authentication is required, only reachability of a multipart endpoint over HTTP.
This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/plug/parsers/multipart.ex and program routines Plug.Parsers.MULTIPART.parse_multipart/2, Plug.Parsers.MULTIPART.parse_multipart_headers/5, Plug.Parsers.MULTIPART.parse_multipart_body/4, and Plug.Parsers.MULTIPART.parse_multipart_file/4.
This issue affects plug: from 1.4.0-rc.0 before 1.16.6, from 1.17.0 before 1.17.4, from 1.18.0 before 1.18.5, from 1.19.1 before 1.19.5, and from 1.20.0 before 1.20.3.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (6.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.9 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 6.9 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source
- EG Likelihood
- 1.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it