Skip to content

Soup Sieve has Memory Exhaustion via Large Comma-Separated Selector Lists

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 1, 2026 in facelessuser/soupsieve

Package

pip soupsieve (pip)

Affected versions

<= 2.8.3

Patched versions

2.8.4

Description

Summary

The CSS selector parser in soupsieve (the CSS selector engine for Beautiful Soup 4) allocates unbounded memory when compiling large comma-separated selector lists. An attacker who can supply a crafted CSS selector string to soupsieve.compile() or Beautiful Soup's .select() / .select_one() can cause the application to allocate hundreds of megabytes of heap memory from a relatively small input, leading to memory exhaustion and denial of service.

To be completely transparent, AI tools helped surface this issue. However, it was independently reproduced and carefully validated. Researchers follow responsible disclosure practices and originally shared this report privately.

A 500 KB selector string triggers allocation of approximately 244 MB of heap memory - a 488x— amplification ratio**.

Details

Affected code: soupsieve/css_parser.py, lines ~204, 925, 1106

The soupsieve CSS parser splits comma-separated selector lists and creates one CSSSelector object per list item. Each CSSSelector object contains parsed selector data structures including SelectorList, Selector, and associated tag/attribute/pseudo-class metadata.

When a selector string such as a,a,a,... (with 250,000 comma-separated items) is passed to sv.compile(), the parser:

  1. Tokenises the entire string and identifies each comma-delimited segment (line ~1106)
  2. Parses each segment into a full Selector object with all associated metadata (line ~925)
  3. Stores all parsed selectors in a SelectorList (line ~204)

Root cause: No limit is enforced on the number of selectors in a comma-separated list. The parser will attempt to parse and store an arbitrary number of selectors, with each selector object consuming approximately 976 bytes of heap memory. The total allocation scales linearly with the number of list items, but the amplification ratio (output memory / input bytes) is extremely high because each single-character selector like a expands into a complex object graph.

Attack surface: Any application that passes user-supplied CSS selectors to soupsieve.compile() or Beautiful Soup's .select() / .select_one().

Proof of Concept

import tracemalloc
import soupsieve as sv

tracemalloc.start()

# Build a 500 KB selector string: "a,a,a,...,a" (250,000 items)
count = 250_000
selector = ",".join("a" for _ in range(count))
print(f"Selector string size: {len(selector):,} bytes ({len(selector) / 1024:.0f} KB)")

# Compile the selector — this allocates ~244 MB
compiled = sv.compile(selector)

current, peak = tracemalloc.get_traced_memory()
tracemalloc.stop()

print(f"Compiled selector count: {len(compiled.selectors):,}")
print(f"Current memory: {current / 1024 / 1024:.1f} MB")
print(f"Peak memory: {peak / 1024 / 1024:.1f} MB")
print(f"Amplification ratio: {peak / len(selector):.0f}x")

# Expected output:
# Selector string size: 499,999 bytes (488 KB)
# Compiled selector count: 250,000
# Current memory: ~244 MB
# Peak memory: ~244 MB
# Amplification ratio: ~488x

Impact

Severity: High

An attacker can exhaust available memory on any server-side Python application that compiles user-supplied CSS selectors via soupsieve. This can cause:

  • OOM kills in containerised deployments (Kubernetes pods, Docker containers) with memory limits
  • Swap thrashing on bare-metal servers, degrading performance for all co-located processes
  • Process termination via Python's MemoryError exception if the system runs out of addressable memory
Parameter Value
Input size ~500 KB selector string
Memory allocated ~244 MB
Amplification ratio ~488×
Per-object overhead ~976 bytes per selector
Authentication required None
User interaction required None

Scalability of attack: The memory allocation scales linearly - doubling the selector count doubles memory usage. An attacker can tune the payload to exactly exhaust a target's memory limits. Multiple concurrent requests multiply the effect.

Downstream exposure: soupsieve is an automatic dependency of beautifulsoup4, one of the most widely installed Python packages. Any web application accepting CSS selectors from users (e.g., web scraping APIs, content filtering tools, CMS preview features) is potentially affected.


Credit

Discovered by a security research team from the University of Sydney, focused on detecting open source software vulnerabilities.
Liyi Zhou: https://lzhou1110.github.io/
Ziyue Wang: https://zyy0530.github.io/
Strick: https://str1ckl4nd.github.io/
Maurice: https://maurice.busystar.org/
Chenchen Yu: https://7thparkk.github.io/

References

@facelessuser facelessuser published to facelessuser/soupsieve Jun 1, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 9, 2026
Reviewed Jul 9, 2026

Severity

High

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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

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.
(51st percentile)

Weaknesses

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource. Learn more on MITRE.

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-49476

GHSA ID

GHSA-2wc2-fm75-p42x

Credits

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