CVE-2026-108147

MEDIUMPre-NVD 5.35.3
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 5.3 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: MODERATE) published 2026-11-03. A secondary CVSS source baseline 5.3; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-116018 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-9v48-h9hx-rjpv (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

5.3EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorNo release containing the referenced fix is confirmed: check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 5.3Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).

An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.3, 6.0.4 before 6.0.10, and 5.2.13 before 5.2.19. django.http.multipartparser.MultiPartParser is subject to excessive memory consumption when processing multipart file uploads with base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding, which could be buffered entirely in memory before being passed to upload handlers. 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 Ignacy Kujawa for reporting this issue.

CVSS v3
5.3
EG Score
5.3MEDIUMhigh confidence
EG Risk
39
EG Risk 39/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity53% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.3 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
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.
Action: A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (5.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
5.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
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.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.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 referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule 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.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.

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

Published

November 3, 2026

Last Modified

November 3, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-108147(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 8× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-03 19:27 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-11-03 19:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-9v48-h9hx-rjpv · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 5.3
  3. 2026-11-03 18:32 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-11-03 18:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-9v48-h9hx-rjpv · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 5.3
  5. 2026-11-03 17:03 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-116018 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  6. 2026-11-03 16:28 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-11-03 15:47 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 5.3 MEDIUM
  8. 2026-11-03 15:46 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-108147?
CVE-2026-108147 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 3, 2026. An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.3, 6.0.4 before 6.0.10, and 5.2.13 before 5.2.19. django.http.multipartparser.MultiPartParser is subject to excessive memory consumption when processing multipart file uploads with base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding, which could be buffered entirely in…
When was CVE-2026-108147 made public?
CVE-2026-108147 was made public on November 3, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, Django Software Foundation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on November 3, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of November 3, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-108147?
CVE-2026-108147 has a CVSS base score of 5.3 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-108147?
A fix for CVE-2026-108147 is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but EchelonGraph has no release containing it on record. Check that reference and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains the fix and update to it; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-108147 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-108147

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-108147?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.