Skip to content
Fencer Intel
high 7.5

CVE-2026-126191 json

Soup Sieve: Exponential ReDoS in selector compilation via \9-run in CSS_ESCAPES/IDENTIFIER

published 9d ago modified 14h ago also EUVD-2026-124551 , GHSA-6655-6qjp-jx7x

cvss
7.5
version 3.1, CNA
cisa kev
Not listed
not in CISA's catalog
epss
0.4%
EPSS 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 38%
public exploits
0
none known

Summary

Soup Sieve is a CSS selector library designed to be used with Beautiful Soup 4. Prior to 3.0, the CSS_ESCAPES and IDENTIFIER regular-expression subpatterns can backtrack exponentially on runs of ambiguous digit escapes in an attribute-name or tag position of an otherwise valid selector. The failure occurs during selector compilation through soupsieve.compile() or Beautiful Soup select() before SELECTOR_LIMIT is applied, so an application that accepts untrusted selector strings can have a worker stalled by a short input. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.

Patch / fix

Is CVE-2026-126191 in your dependencies? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.

Check with Fencer

CISA SSVC

Exploitation
Proof of concept is public
Automatable
yes
Technical impact
partial
Assessed
15h ago

Exploit prediction

0.43% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 38% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-13).

CVSS scores

assigned by version score vector
CNA 3.1 7.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
GitHub 3.1 7.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Affected packages

ecosystem package affected fixed in
pypi soupsieve
<3.0.2
3.0.2

Affected products

  • facelessuser soupsieve

Classification

Weakness
  • CWE-1333 Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity

References

Sources

Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.

The maintainers of facelessuser/soupsieve published their own advisory on GitHub. Reviewed sources take precedence over it.