CVE-2026-15307: Server-side file-write and request forgery via spatial lookups
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 34/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 66.5% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: djangoproject Django 5.2.17, 6.0.8.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to djangoproject Django 5.2.17, 6.0.8 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. GeoDjango spatial lookups optimistically parse the right-hand-side value as a raster by passing it to the `django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster` constructor. Any value used in a spatial lookup against a `GeometryField` or `RasterField` reaches this constructor, including untrusted input, for example a spatial-field filter submitted through the Django admin changelist query string by a staff user with view permission. A `dict`, or a `str` holding its JSON representation, is opened in write mode regardless of the constructor's `write=False` default, allowing a file with an attacker-chosen name and contents to be written through a file-backed GDAL driver. Any other `str` is treated as a datasource, allowing an outbound network request through a GDAL virtual filesystem handler. Writing a file to a location later imported by the application can result in remote code execution. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.1.x, 5.0.x, and 4.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Bence Nagy, localhost-detect, and kimchunbok_ for reporting this issue.
- Published
- Aug 4, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 24, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.1% · 66th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-73
Report tools
Action score
34
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 34 / 40 · 8.7 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.1%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · DSF
- 8.8
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| djangoproject | django | cpe:2.3:a:djangoproject:django |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- djangoproject djangobefore 5.2.17
- djangoproject django6.0 and later · before 6.0.8
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (DSF). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
djangoproject Django
- 6.0.8, 5.2.17not affected
- 6.0 and later · before 6.0.8affected · python
- 5.2 and later · before 5.2.17affected · python
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine:v3.24 | py3-django | before 5.2.17-r0 | 5.2.17-r0 |
| Debian:12 | python-django | from 0 | — |
| Debian:14 | python-django | before 3:5.2.17-1 | 3:5.2.17-1 |
| openSUSE:Leap 16.0 | python-Django | before 5.2.4-bp160.11.1 | 5.2.4-bp160.11.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | python-Django | before 6.0.8-1.1 | 6.0.8-1.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | python-Django4 | before 4.2.30-5.1 | 4.2.30-5.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | python-Django5 | before 5.2.17-1.1 | 5.2.17-1.1 |
| PyPI | django | from 6.0a1 · before 6.0.8 | 6.0.8 |
| PyPI | django | before 5.2.17 | 5.2.17 |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el8 | automation-controller-cli | before 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap | 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el8 | python3.12-django | before 0:5.2.17-1.el8ap | 0:5.2.17-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el9 | automation-controller-cli | before 0:4.6.32-1.el9ap | 0:4.6.32-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el9 | python3.12-django | before 0:5.2.17-1.el9ap | 0:5.2.17-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.6::el10 | python-django | before 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap | 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.6::el10 | python3-django | before 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap | 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.6::el9 | automation-controller-cli | before 0:4.7.16-1.el9ap | 0:4.7.16-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | automation-controller-venv-tower | before 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap | 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | automation-gateway-server | before 0:2.5.20260824-1.el8ap | 0:2.5.20260824-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | python3.12-aiohttp | before 0:3.14.3-1.el8ap | 0:3.14.3-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | python3.12-gitpython | before 0:3.1.59-1.el8ap | 0:3.1.59-1.el8ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el9 | automation-controller-venv-tower | before 0:4.6.32-1.el9ap | 0:4.6.32-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el9 | automation-gateway-server | before 0:2.5.20260824-1.el9ap | 0:2.5.20260824-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el9 | python3.12-aiohttp | before 0:3.14.3-1.el9ap | 0:3.14.3-1.el9ap |
| Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el9 | python3.12-gitpython | before 0:3.1.59-1.el9ap | 0:3.1.59-1.el9ap |
+7
Same product
djangoproject: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-34265An issue was discovered in Django 3.2 before 3.2.14 and 4.0 before 4.0.6.61This week
- CVE-2020-7471Django 1.11 before 1.11.28, 2.2 before 2.2.10, and 3.0 before 3.0.3 allows SQL Injection if untrusted data is used as a StringAgg delimiter 59Plan
- CVE-2019-19844Django before 1.11.27, 2.x before 2.2.9, and 3.x before 3.0.1 allows account takeover.55Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-53877Jul 7, 2026 · Heap buffer over-read in GDALRaster25Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-53878Jul 7, 2026 · Header injection possibility since DomainNameValidator accepted newlines in input21Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-15337Aug 4, 2026 · Potential denial-of-service vulnerability in check_for_language()27Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| djangoproject Django | 5.2.17 | Vendor (CNA) |
| djangoproject Django | 6.0.8 | Vendor (CNA) |
| alpine:py3-django | 5.2.17-r0 · Alpine:v3.24 | Package registry (OSV) |
| debian:python-django | 3:5.2.17-1 · Debian:14 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:python-Django | 6.0.8-1.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:python-Django4 | 4.2.30-5.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:python-Django5 | 5.2.17-1.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
| PyPI:django | 5.2.17 | Package registry (OSV) |
| PyPI:django | 6.0.8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:automation-controller-cli | 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:automation-controller-venv-tower | 0:4.6.32-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:automation-gateway-server | 0:2.5.20260824-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:automation-platform-ui | 0:2.6.13-1.el9ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.6::el9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python-django | 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.6::el10 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3-django | 0:5.2.17-1.el10ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.6::el10 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3.12-aiohttp | 0:3.14.3-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3.12-aiohttp-debuginfo | 0:3.14.3-1.el9ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.6::el9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3.12-aiohttp-debugsource | 0:3.14.3-1.el9ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.6::el9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3.12-django | 0:5.2.17-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform_developer:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:python3.12-gitpython | 0:3.1.59-1.el8ap · Red Hat:ansible_automation_platform:2.5::el8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:python-Django | 4.2.11-150600.3.65.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Package Hub 15 SP7 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Jacob Wallsremediation developer
- Natalia Bidartcoordinator
- Bence Nagy, localhost-detect, and kimchunbok_reporter
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
—
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
- CVE-2026-3902119 days apartASGI header spoofing via underscore/hyphen conflation30Monitor
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-73 · External Control of File Name or PathCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
- Leverage Alternate EncodingCAPEC-267likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-64likelihood: High · High
- URL EncodingCAPEC-72likelihood: High · High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-78likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-79likelihood: High · High
- Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-80likelihood: High · High
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (6 more)Show less
- github.com/django/django/commit/115ffd0463a765ab1cc93de18e94b5459b8a300e
- github.com/django/django/commit/208f80cb682868b584ed0a78f23e4ba6304212aa
- github.com/django/django/commit/39b3e2d0c743a338def6c473086ebc06865e86b6
- github.com/django/django/commit/f1949c1f9758947ade984c895ff16bef46f56520
- groups.google.com/g/django-announce
- www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2026/aug/04/security-releases/
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.