CVE-2026-54134: OctoPrint: File exfiltration possible via query parameters on upload endpoints
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 28/100)
- 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: 0.32% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- Fixed version: octoprint (PyPI) 2.0.0rc3, 1.11.8.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to octoprint (PyPI) 2.0.0rc3, 1.11.8 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
OctoPrint provides a web interface for controlling consumer 3D printers. Prior to 1.11.8 and 2.0.0rc3, OctoPrint's custom Tornado upload handler and Flask with Werkzeug parse request parameters differently, allowing an attacker with FILE_UPLOAD permission to inject reserved internal upload fields through query parameters or parser differentials despite the earlier GHSA-m9jh-jf9h-x3h2 fix. The affected endpoints are /api/files/{local|sdcard}, /api/languages, /plugin/backup/restore, and /plugin/pluginmanager/upload_file. An attacker can make OctoPrint treat an arbitrary host file as a temporary upload, move it into a downloadable upload directory, disclose configuration secrets or other readable files, and remove runtime files in a way that can affect a later restart. This issue is fixed in versions 1.11.8 and 2.0.0rc3.
- Published
- Aug 21, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 14, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.3% · 25th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-73
Report tools
Action score
28
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 28 / 40 · 7.0 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.3%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 7.0
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
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.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi 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.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
OctoPrint OctoPrint
- < 1.11.8, >= 2.0.0rc1, < 2.0.0rc3affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | octoprint | from 2.0.0rc1 · before 2.0.0rc3 | 2.0.0rc3 |
| PyPI | octoprint | before 1.11.8 | 1.11.8 |
Same product
octoprint: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2025-58180OctoPrint is Vulnerable to RCE Attacks via Unsanitized Filename in File Upload38Monitor
- CVE-2024-32977OctoPrint Authentication Bypass via X-Forwarded-For Header when autologinLocal is enabled37Monitor
- CVE-2018-16710OctoPrint through 1.3.9 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service via HTTP requests on port 8081.37Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-23892Jan 27, 2026 · OctoPrint has Timing Side-Channel Vulnerability in API Key Authentication24Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-35163Aug 21, 2026 · OctoPrint: XSS in Suppressed Command Notifications18Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-123364Nov 9, 2026 · OctoPrint: Stored XSS via saved connection parameters9Monitor
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 |
|---|---|---|
| PyPI:octoprint | 1.11.8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| PyPI:octoprint | 2.0.0rc3 | 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.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2025-48067437 days apartOctoPrint vulnerable to possible file extraction via upload endpoints18Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone on the same network segment 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
- Adjacent
- 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:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
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 (4 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.