Independent & educational platform Not a government body. No link or affiliation with any government organisation. Made for learning only. Test only systems you own or are authorised to test. Become a Partner or Sponsor → Full disclaimer

CVE-2026-94194

Severity not reported
Data quality: partial. Some fields were not provided by the source.

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') vulnerability in elixir-mint mint allows a malicious HTTP/1 server to desynchr…

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') vulnerability in elixir-mint mint allows a malicious HTTP/1 server to desynchronize an intermediary and the Mint client on a pooled connection, poisoning the responses to subsequent requests that share the connection. message_body/1 in lib/mint/http1.ex selects chunked framing when chunked is the first coding listed in a response's Transfer-Encoding fields. RFC 9112 section 6.3 applies chunked framing only when chunked is the final coding, and otherwise reads the body until the server closes the connection. For a response such as Transfer-Encoding: chunked, gzip, an intermediary that follows the RFC treats every byte up to the close as the body, while Mint ends the body at the zero-length chunk and parses the remaining bytes as the response to the next request on the connection. Mint also keeps the connection open after an HTTP/1.0 response, final or 1xx, that carries Transfer-Encoding and Connection: keep-alive. RFC 9112 section 6.1 requires treating the framing of such a message as faulty and closing the connection after it, so bytes after its chunked body are parsed as the response to the next request in the same way. This issue affects mint: from 0.1.0 before 1.10.2.

CVSS
—
Not reported by the source
Timeline (UTC)
Published: 2026-09-28 12:17
Modified: 2026-09-30 14:17
NVD status: Deferred
Last synced 2 days ago
Verified against the source API 2026-10-27 06:56 UTC
Exploitation
Not listed in CISA KEV (as of last catalog sync)
Absence from KEV does not mean a CVE is not exploited. Exploitation status: unknown (no authoritative evidence in our sources).

Affected products

Not reported by the source (unknown — not "none").

Weakness classification (CWE)

Source: NVD / CISA. “NVD-CWE-Other” and “NVD-CWE-noinfo” mean NVD could not assign a specific weakness.

Mitigation & advisories

No vendor advisory or patch reference tagged by NVD. Check the references below.

References

Data sources

NVD CVE API 2.0 — fetched 2026-10-27 06:56 UTC · record ↗

Learn the basics

Understanding CVEs and CVSS Scores