CVE-2026-100347

CVE-2026-100347 is a medium-severity improper input validation vulnerability in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go), affecting versions <= 0.144.0. It is fixed in 0.145.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

kin-openapi: Unauthenticated panic (DoS) in openapi3filter legacy router via non-canonical/unsupported HTTP method on a static path

The openapi3filter.ValidationHandler (the exported, documented request-validation middleware) hard-wires the legacy router (routers/legacy). That router matches the incoming request method verbatim against a trie built exclusively from upper-cased canonical HTTP methods. A request carrying a method token that is not one of the 9 standard methods, a legitimate-but-unsupported token such as PROPFIND, or a non-canonical case variant such as lowercase get, misses the trie, leaves route == nil, and for an existing static path falls through to PathItem.GetOperation(method), whose default: case calls panic(...). The panic fires inside route resolution, before any authentication runs. This is an unauthenticated, remotely triggerable denial of service (recovered per-connection panic + unbounded error-log growth).

Root Cause

  • openapi3filter/validation_handler.go:39, ValidationHandler.Load() always constructs legacyrouter.NewRouter(doc); there is no alternative router option on this path.
  • routers/legacy/router.go:109, the request method is used verbatim (method, url := req.Method, ...); there is no canonicalization or rejection of unknown method tokens.
  • routers/legacy/router.go:69-70, the trie is populated with strings.ToUpper(method) keys taken from pathItem.Operations() (canonical http.Method* constants only).
  • routers/legacy/router.go:141, root.Match(method + " " + remainingPath) misses for a non-canonical/unsupported method → route == nil.
  • routers/legacy/router.go:146-150, in the route == nil block, doc.Paths.Value(path) returns non-nil for an existing static path, and control reaches pathItem.GetOperation(method).
  • openapi3/path_item.go:174, GetOperation's switch method has no matching case → default: panic(fmt.Errorf("unsupported HTTP method %q", method)).

Proof of Concept

Serve any spec with a static path (e.g. /ping) behind openapi3filter.ValidationHandler, then:

printf 'PROPFIND /ping HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: x\r\n\r\n' | nc target 8080   # connection aborted (panic)
printf 'get /ping HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: x\r\n\r\n'      | nc target 8080   # connection aborted (panic)
printf 'GET /ping HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: x\r\n\r\n'      | nc target 8080   # 200 OK (process survived)

Reproduced end-to-end against a real net/http.Server + ValidationHandler: PROPFIND /ping and lowercase get /ping both abort the connection with a panic at path_item.go:174 (stack: GetOperation <- legacy.FindRoute router.go:150 <- ValidationHandler.validateRequest validation_handler.go:84); the process stays alive and subsequent GET /ping returns 200.

Attack Chain

  1. Entry: unauthenticated PROPFIND /ping HTTP/1.1 (any known static path). Guard: net/http method validation. Bypass proof: net/http accepts any valid HTTP token as a method, PROPFIND and lowercase get both reach the handler.
  2. Route match: legacy/router.go:141 root.Match("PROPFIND /ping"). Guard: trie match. Bypass proof: trie holds only upper-cased canonical methods → miss → route == nil.
  3. route == nil block: router.go:146 doc.Paths.Value("/ping") → non-nil for an existing static path (exact map lookup). Guard: pathItem == nil check (l.147). Bypass proof: static path exists → not nil → proceeds.
  4. Sink: router.go:150 pathItem.GetOperation("PROPFIND") → path_item.go:174 default: panic(...).
  5. Impact: handler goroutine panics; net/http recovers per connection; request never reaches auth.

Bypass Evidence

  • net/http does NOT reject non-standard method tokens, confirmed empirically: PROPFIND and lowercase get both reached the handler and panicked.
  • No canonicalization/rejection exists between FindRoute entry and GetOperation; req.Method is used verbatim (router.go:109).
  • git show v0.144.0:openapi3/path_item.go shows panic(...) at line 174; git show v0.144.0:routers/legacy/router.go shows verbatim method use and the unguarded GetOperation call. git log v0.144.0..HEAD on these files is empty (no post-tag fix).

Scoping Note

The panic requires the request path to be an exact static (non-templated) key in the served spec. A concrete path against a /{id} template returns a clean 500 (not a panic), because Paths.Value is an exact map lookup. Static paths (/health, /login, /version, /metrics, /ping, /) are ubiquitous in real specs and discoverable from public specs/standard endpoints, so a vulnerable target almost always exists. This makes the finding arguably broader than existing panic advisories, as it needs no special spec construct, any static path suffices.

Affected Versions

<= 0.144.0 (present on the latest release tag v0.144.0; long-standing; no patched version).

Impact

An unauthenticated attacker sends a single request with a non-standard HTTP method token to any existing static path. The handler goroutine panics; Go's net/http recovers the panic per connection (process survives), aborts the connection (client sees a reset / 500), and logs a full stack trace. Repeated requests cause connection churn and unbounded http: panic serving log growth, and the request never reaches authentication. Availability impact (A:L) under the default synchronous ValidationHandler middleware; on non-net/http hosts or when reached on an application goroutine the ceiling is a full crash.

The application does not adequately validate input before processing it, allowing unexpected values to reach sensitive code paths. Typical impact: varies by context: data corruption, logic bypass, or denial of service.

CVE-2026-100347 has a CVSS score of 5.3 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.145.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (<= 0.144.0)

Security releases

github.com/getkin/kin-openapi → 0.145.0 (go)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

In the legacy router, canonicalize/validate the request method before route resolution and return ErrMethodNotAllowed/ErrPathNotFound for unknown methods, or make PathItem.GetOperation return an error (nil) for unrecognized methods instead of calling panic.

Reported by zx (Jace), GitHub: @manus-use

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-100347? CVE-2026-100347 is a medium-severity improper input validation vulnerability in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go), affecting versions <= 0.144.0. It is fixed in 0.145.0. The application does not adequately validate input before processing it, allowing unexpected values to reach sensitive code paths.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-100347? CVE-2026-100347 has a CVSS score of 5.3 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of github.com/getkin/kin-openapi are affected by CVE-2026-100347? github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go) versions <= 0.144.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-100347? Yes. CVE-2026-100347 is fixed in 0.145.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-100347 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-100347 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-100347 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-100347? Upgrade github.com/getkin/kin-openapi to 0.145.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.