CVE-2026-15307
published 2026-08-04CVE-2026-15307: 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…
PriorityP260high8.8CVSS 3.1
AVNACLPRLUINSUCHIHAH
EPSS
1.13%
66.2th percentile
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.
Affected
40 ranges· showing 25
| Vendor | Product | Version range | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | eda-controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | hub-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | lightspeed-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | eda-controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | gateway-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | hub-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | lightspeed-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | eda-controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | gateway-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | hub-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | lightspeed-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | aap-cloud-billing-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | eda-controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | gateway-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | hub-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | lightspeed-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | metrics-service-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-tech-preview | metrics-service-rhel9 | — | — |
CVSS provenance
nvdv3.18.8HIGHCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvdv4.08.7HIGHCVSS: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
vendor_redhat8.8HIGH
vendor_ubuntu8.8HIGH
Stop checking back — get the weekly exploitation signal.
Every Monday: what got weaponized or added to CISA KEV in the last seven days — each CVE cross-linked to its PoC, Nuclei template, and detection rule. Free, one email a week, unsubscribe in one click.
Ubuntu
Django vulnerabilities
vendor_ubuntu·2026-09-30·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-8404 [HIGH] Django vulnerabilities
Title: Django vulnerabilities
Summary: Several security issues were fixed in Django.
Bence Nagy discovered that GeoDjango in Django incorrectly handled spatial
lookups when processing untrusted input. A remote attacker could possibly
use this issue to make outbound network requests, write arbitrary files, or
execute arbitrary code. This issue was only addressed in Ubuntu 22.04 LTS,
Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-15307)
Ahmad Sadeddin discovered that Django UpdateCacheMiddleware incorrectly
cached requests where the Vary header contained an asterisk. A remote
attacker could possibly use this issue to obtain sensitive information.
(CVE-2026-6907)
Ahmed Badawe discovered that Django did not properly parse Cache-Control
response directives case-insensitively under certain
Red Hat
django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
vendor_redhat·2026-08-04·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-15307 [HIGH] CWE-434 django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
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
GHSA
An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.2, 6.0 before 6.0.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.18.
ghsa_unreviewed·2026-10-06·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-87890 [HIGH] CWE-918 An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.2, 6.0 before 6.0.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.18.
An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.2, 6.0 before 6.0.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.18.
An incomplete fix for CVE-2026-15307 in Django spatial lookups allows an attacker who can supply `bytes` values to cause the Django process to make network requests via a crafted VRT document referencing an external raster source.
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 sicksec for reporting this issue.
GHSA
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
ghsa_unreviewed·2026-08-04
CVE-2026-15307 [HIGH] CWE-73 An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
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 ne
GHSA
Django GeoDjango spatial lookups allow file writes and outbound requests through GDAL raster parsing
ghsa·2026-08-04
CVE-2026-15307 [HIGH] CWE-73 Django GeoDjango spatial lookups allow file writes and outbound requests through GDAL raster parsing
Django GeoDjango spatial lookups allow file writes and outbound requests through GDAL raster parsing
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
No detection rules found.
No public exploits indexed.
Hackernews
⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
blogs_hackernews·2026-08-31
CVE-2026-81578 ⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
Home
Threat Intelligence
Vulnerabilities
Cyber Attacks
Webinars
Expert Insights
Awards
Webinars
Awards
Free eBooks
About THN
Jobs
Advertise with us
## ⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
The boring parts caused most of the trouble.
A router shipped ready to listen. A fake check turned the user into the installer. Trusted systems collected traffic and passwords, then cleaned the logs. Old bugs formed new attack chains. Even an AI agent decided its assigned task was optional.
Elsewhere, fake apps, helpful support calls, cheap banking kits, exposed systems, and weak defaults kept things moving. Different attacks, same useful mistake: something familiar was trusted without a second look.
Here is the week...
## ⚡ Threat of the
Hackernews
⚡ Weekly Recap: AI Goes Rogue, Metabase 0-Day, MCP Supply-Chain Attacks, and Router Backdoors
blogs_hackernews·2026-08-10
CVE-2026-34348 ⚡ Weekly Recap: AI Goes Rogue, Metabase 0-Day, MCP Supply-Chain Attacks, and Router Backdoors
Home
Threat Intelligence
Vulnerabilities
Cyber Attacks
Webinars
Expert Insights
Awards
Webinars
Awards
Free eBooks
About THN
Jobs
Advertise with us
## ⚡ Weekly Recap: AI Goes Rogue, Metabase 0-Day, MCP Supply-Chain Attacks, and Router Backdoors
A lot of security problems still begin with someone doing a completely normal thing. Cloning a repo. Answering a call. Leaving a box exposed. Trusting the default.
That pretty much covers the mood this week. Old bugs are back, supply chains are getting stranger, and some exploit paths are so short you wonder what was supposed to stop them in the first place.
That’s only part of it. Here’s everything else that made the Monday recap.
## ⚡ Threat of the Week
Anthropic's Model Attempts to Poison Open-Source Project — A new evaluati
Hackernews
Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
blogs_hackernews·2026-08-05·CVSS 9.5
CVE-2026-58073 [CRITICAL] Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
Home
Threat Intelligence
Vulnerabilities
Cyber Attacks
Webinars
Expert Insights
Awards
Webinars
Awards
Free eBooks
About THN
Jobs
Advertise with us
## Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
HashiCorp, Veeam, and the Django Software Foundation have patched 11 vulnerabilities across Terraform MCP Server, Veeam Service Provider Console, and Django.
The three most serious:
An unauthenticated flaw in Veeam's console that hands over a managed agent's credentials, rated 9.5
A cross-tenant flaw in HashiCorp's MCP server that lets one user's Terraform token be reused for later users' requests, scored a maximum 10.0 on its CVE record
A flaw in GeoDjango's spatial lookups that can write a file to disk and, on some setups, run code, rea
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-87890 python-django4.2: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [epel-all]
bugzilla·2026-10-07·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-87890 [HIGH] CVE-2026-87890 python-django4.2: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [epel-all]
CVE-2026-87890 python-django4.2: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [epel-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
A flaw was found in Django's GIS support. Spatial lookups accepted raster values supplied as raw bytes without requiring them to first be wrapped in django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster. Because such values are opened through GDAL's in-memory virtual filesystem, a crafted value could contain a VRT document referencing an external raster source, causing GDAL to issue outbound network requests as the Django process user while preparing the lookup. An applicatio
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-87890 python-django5: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
bugzilla·2026-10-07·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-87890 [HIGH] CVE-2026-87890 python-django5: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
CVE-2026-87890 python-django5: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
A flaw was found in Django's GIS support. Spatial lookups accepted raster values supplied as raw bytes without requiring them to first be wrapped in django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster. Because such values are opened through GDAL's in-memory virtual filesystem, a crafted value could contain a VRT document referencing an external raster source, causing GDAL to issue outbound network requests as the Django process user while preparing the lookup. An applicatio
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-87890 python-django6: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
bugzilla·2026-10-07·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-87890 [HIGH] CVE-2026-87890 python-django6: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
CVE-2026-87890 python-django6: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups [fedora-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
A flaw was found in Django's GIS support. Spatial lookups accepted raster values supplied as raw bytes without requiring them to first be wrapped in django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster. Because such values are opened through GDAL's in-memory virtual filesystem, a crafted value could contain a VRT document referencing an external raster source, causing GDAL to issue outbound network requests as the Django process user while preparing the lookup. An applicatio
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-87890 django: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups
bugzilla·2026-09-30·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-87890 [HIGH] CVE-2026-87890 django: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups
CVE-2026-87890 django: Server-side request forgery via unvalidated bytes in spatial lookups
A flaw was found in Django's GIS support. Spatial lookups accepted raster values supplied as raw bytes without requiring them to first be wrapped in django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster. Because such values are opened through GDAL's in-memory virtual filesystem, a crafted value could contain a VRT document referencing an external raster source, causing GDAL to issue outbound network requests as the Django process user while preparing the lookup. An application that passes attacker-controlled bytes directly into a spatial lookup could therefore be induced to make server-side requests to attacker-chosen hosts. This issue was overlooked in the fix for CVE-2026-15307. It is a backward-incompatible fix: r
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-15307 python-django4.2: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups [epel-all]
bugzilla·2026-08-11·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-15307 [HIGH] CVE-2026-15307 python-django4.2: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups [epel-all]
CVE-2026-15307 python-django4.2: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups [epel-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
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
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-15307 django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
bugzilla·2026-08-04·CVSS 8.8
CVE-2026-15307 [HIGH] CVE-2026-15307 django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
CVE-2026-15307 django: Django: Remote code execution via GeoDjango spatial lookups
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-bac
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/security/https://github.com/django/django/commit/115ffd0463a765ab1cc93de18e94b5459b8a300ehttps://github.com/django/django/commit/208f80cb682868b584ed0a78f23e4ba6304212aahttps://github.com/django/django/commit/39b3e2d0c743a338def6c473086ebc06865e86b6https://github.com/django/django/commit/f1949c1f9758947ade984c895ff16bef46f56520https://groups.google.com/g/django-announcehttps://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2026/aug/04/security-releases/
2026-08-04
Published