Summary
Tornado interprets -, +, and _ in chunk length and Content-Length values, which are not allowed by the HTTP RFCs. This can result in request smuggling when Tornado is deployed behind certain proxies that interpret those non-standard characters differently. This is known to apply to older versions of haproxy, although the current release is not affected.
Details
Tornado uses the int constructor to parse the values of Content-Length headers and chunk lengths in the following locations:
tornado/http1connection.py:445
self._expected_content_remaining = int(headers["Content-Length"])
tornado/http1connection.py:621
content_length = int(headers["Content-Length"]) # type: Optional[int]
tornado/http1connection.py:671
chunk_len = int(chunk_len_str.strip(), 16)
Because int("0_0") == int("+0") == int("-0") == int("0"), using the int constructor to parse and validate strings that should contain only ASCII digits is not a good strategy.
Impact
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.
Remediation advice
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX? GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX is a medium-severity security vulnerability in tornado (pip), affecting versions < 6.3.3. It is fixed in 6.3.3.
- Which versions of tornado are affected by GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX? tornado (pip) versions < 6.3.3 is affected.
- Is there a fix for GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX? Yes. GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX is fixed in 6.3.3. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX 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 GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX 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 GHSA-QPPV-J76H-2RPX? Upgrade
tornadoto 6.3.3 or later.