Summary
Mistune plugins/formatting: quadratic-time parsing on long runs of ~~x~~, ==x==, and ^^x^^ markers (strikethrough / mark / insert)
Type: Algorithmic-complexity denial of service. A run of N closed pairs ~~x~~~~x~~... (or the analogous ==x== for mark, ^^x^^ for insert) causes O(N²) work in the formatting parser. With the strikethrough, mark, or insert plugin enabled, an 8 KB input pegs the CPU for ~4 seconds; 16 KB → ~17 seconds.
File: src/mistune/plugins/formatting.py, lines 13-15 (the _STRIKE_END / _MARK_END / _INSERT_END patterns and their per-position scan).
Root cause: for each opening ~~/==/^^ the parser scans forward for the matching close pattern. The scan itself uses a bounded regex, but the parser tries the close-scan at every potential start position. For input shaped like ~~x~~ repeated N times, every ~~ is examined as a possible start, each scan covers up to the end of input. Total work is O(N²). Default config without these plugins handles the same input in linear time (4 ms for 4000 reps), confirming the cost is in the formatting plugin's per-marker scan, not in core parsing.
Affected Code
File: src/mistune/plugins/formatting.py, lines 12-16.
_STRIKE_END = re.compile(r"(?:" + PREVENT_BACKSLASH + r"\\~|[^\s~])~~(?!~)")
_MARK_END = re.compile(r"(?:" + PREVENT_BACKSLASH + r"\\=|[^\s=])==(?!=)")
_INSERT_END = re.compile(r"(?:" + PREVENT_BACKSLASH + r"\\\^|[^\s^])\^\^(?!\^)")
# Each pattern is scanned forward from every start position fired by the
# corresponding inline rule. The end-pattern itself is bounded; the cost
# comes from the surrounding parser invoking the scan at every '~~' / '==' / '^^'
# token in the input, giving N starts × O(N) per scan = O(N^2) total.
Why it's wrong: the same algorithmic-complexity flaw class as [ / [a parsing in core: a per-token retry loop without memoisation of failed positions. Each formatting marker is tried as both a potential start and as a continuation. A linear-pass delimiter-stack algorithm (matching how commonmark-py and markdown-it-py handle emphasis) would do this work in O(N) total. The bounded regex on each individual scan does not bound the parser-level repetition.
Exploit Chain
- Application uses mistune to render user-supplied markdown and has any of the formatting plugins enabled (
plugins=['strikethrough'],['mark'],['insert'], or any superset). These plugins are commonly enabled because GitHub-flavoured-Markdown compatibility requires~~strikethrough~~and many editors emit==highlighting==and^^underline^^shortcuts. - Attacker submits an 8 KB markdown payload of the form
~~x~~~~x~~~~x~~...(40 000 characters of~~x~~repeated 8000 times, or the analogous shape with==/^^). - Server calls
mistune.create_markdown(plugins=['strikethrough'])(payload). CPU pegs for ~4 seconds; 16 KB → ~17 seconds; 32 KB → ~70 seconds. Pure CPU cost, no significant memory growth. - Repeating the request floods the worker pool. On a single-thread WSGI handler this is one request per outage; on a thread pool, a small number of concurrent attackers exhausts capacity.
Security Impact
Severity: sec-high. Network-reachable, no authentication, predictable scaling, single-payload primitive. Only requires a user-supplied markdown sink and a formatting plugin enabled, both are common.
Attacker capability: small input → large CPU. Doubling input size quadruples CPU time. Sustained requests deny service to other users.
Preconditions: application uses mistune with any of strikethrough, mark, or insert plugins enabled. Default config does NOT enable these (so the attack only fires against the substantial deployed population that turns them on for GFM/markdown-extra compatibility).
Differential: PoC-verified against [email protected]:
import mistune, time
md = mistune.create_markdown(plugins=['strikethrough'])
for n in [500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000]:
s = '~~x~~' * n
t = time.time()
md(s)
print(f' ~~x~~ * {n} ({len(s)}b): {(time.time() - t) * 1000:.0f}ms')
# Output (Python 3.13, Linux, 2.5GHz CPU):
# ~~x~~ * 500 (2500b): 19ms
# ~~x~~ * 1000 (5000b): 71ms
# ~~x~~ * 2000 (10000b): 272ms
# ~~x~~ * 4000 (20000b): 1090ms
# ~~x~~ * 8000 (40000b): 4302ms
# Identical scaling for `==x==` (mark) and `^^x^^` (insert):
md = mistune.create_markdown(plugins=['mark'])
md('==x==' * 4000) # ~1100ms
md = mistune.create_markdown(plugins=['insert'])
md('^^x^^' * 4000) # ~1080ms
# Without the plugin, the same input parses in linear time:
md = mistune.create_markdown() # no plugins
md('~~x~~' * 4000) # 4ms (1000x faster)
The patched build (with the suggested fix below, either a delimiter-stack rewrite or a hard cap on the number of unmatched markers tracked) keeps the time linear in N.
Impact
A regular expression with worst-case exponential or polynomial matching time is applied to untrusted input, causing excessive CPU use. Typical impact: denial of service when input is crafted to trigger backtracking.
CVE-2026-59922 has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). 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 (3.3.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
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
The minimal fix is to cap the number of simultaneously-tracked unmatched markers, treating extras as literal text. The proper fix is a single-pass delimiter-stack algorithm matching the CommonMark reference implementation. Surgical patch:
--- a/src/mistune/plugins/formatting.py
+++ b/src/mistune/plugins/formatting.py
@@ ... in the parse_strikethrough / parse_mark / parse_insert functions
+ # Bound the number of open markers the parser will track concurrently.
+ # Inputs with more than this many open ~~ / == / ^^ in flight are
+ # almost certainly adversarial; CommonMark gives no semantics to
+ # deeply nested unmatched markers.
+ MAX_OPEN_MARKERS = 100
+ if open_marker_count > MAX_OPEN_MARKERS:
+ # treat remaining markers as literal text, do not invoke the
+ # forward-scan to find a close
+ ...
A regression test should assert that md('~~x~~' * 50_000) completes in under 1 second. The same fix shape applies to _MARK_END and _INSERT_END.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-59922? CVE-2026-59922 is a high-severity inefficient regular expression (ReDoS) vulnerability in mistune (pip), affecting versions < 3.3.0. It is fixed in 3.3.0. A regular expression with worst-case exponential or polynomial matching time is applied to untrusted input, causing excessive CPU use.
- How severe is CVE-2026-59922? CVE-2026-59922 has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). 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.
- Which versions of mistune are affected by CVE-2026-59922? mistune (pip) versions < 3.3.0 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-59922? Yes. CVE-2026-59922 is fixed in 3.3.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-59922 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-59922 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
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-59922 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.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-59922? Upgrade
mistuneto 3.3.0 or later.