Skip to content

python-ldap has sanitization bypass in ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Oct 10, 2025 in python-ldap/python-ldap • Updated Oct 13, 2025

Package

pip python-ldap (pip)

Affected versions

< 3.4.5

Patched versions

3.4.5

Description

Summary

The sanitization method ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars can be tricked to skip escaping of special characters when a crafted list or dict is supplied as the assertion_value parameter, and the non-default escape_mode=1 is configured.

Details

The method ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars supports 3 different escaping modes. escape_mode=0 (default) and escape_mode=2 happen to raise exceptions when a list or dict object is supplied as the assertion_value parameter. However, escape_mode=1 happily computes without performing adequate logic to ensure a fully escaped return value.

PoC

>>> import ldap.filter

Exploitable

>>> ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars(["abc@*()/xyz"], escape_mode=1)
'abc@*()/xyz'
>>> ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars({"abc@*()/xyz": 1}, escape_mode=1)
'abc@*()/xyz'

Not exploitable

>>> ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars("abc@*()/xyz", escape_mode=1)
'abc@\\2a\\28\\29\\2fxyz'
>>> ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars(["abc@*()/xyz"], escape_mode=0)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "/usr/local/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/ldap/filter.py", line 41, in escape_filter_chars
    s = assertion_value.replace('\\', r'\5c')
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AttributeError: 'list' object has no attribute 'replace'
>>> ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars(["abc@*()/xyz"], escape_mode=2)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "/usr/local/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/ldap/filter.py", line 36, in escape_filter_chars
    r.append("\\%02x" % ord(c))
                        ^^^^^^
TypeError: ord() expected a character, but string of length 11 found

Impact

If an application relies on the vulnerable method in the python-ldap library to escape untrusted user input, an attacker might be able to abuse the vulnerability to launch ldap injection attacks which could potentially disclose or manipulate ldap data meant to be inaccessible to them.

With Python being a dynamically typed language, and the commonly used JSON format supporting list and dict, it is to be expected that Python applications may commonly forward unchecked and potentially malicious list and dict objects to the vulnerable sanitization method.

The vulnerable escape_mode=1 configuration does not appear to be widely used.

Suggested Fix

Add a type check at the start of the ldap.filter.escape_filter_chars method to raise an exception when the supplied assertion_value parameter is not of type str.

References

@droideck droideck published to python-ldap/python-ldap Oct 10, 2025
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Oct 10, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Oct 10, 2025
Reviewed Oct 10, 2025
Last updated Oct 13, 2025

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity Low
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(18th percentile)

Weaknesses

Failure to Sanitize Special Elements into a Different Plane (Special Element Injection)

The product does not adequately filter user-controlled input for special elements with control implications. Learn more on MITRE.

Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion')

The product allocates or initializes a resource such as a pointer, object, or variable using one type, but it later accesses that resource using a type that is incompatible with the original type. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2025-61911

GHSA ID

GHSA-r7r6-cc7p-4v5m

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.