Skip to content

Thumbor has HMAC validation bypass via multiple .replace() calls when removing URL signature

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 10, 2026 in thumbor/thumbor • Updated Sep 30, 2026

Package

pip thumbor (pip)

Affected versions

<= 7.7.7

Patched versions

7.8.0

Description

HMAC validation bypass via multiple .replace() calls when removing URL signature

Summary

Thumbor’s HMAC validation can be bypassed due to the use of Python’s .replace() when removing the signature from the URL before validation. Since .replace() removes all occurrences of the substring, an attacker can insert the same signature multiple times in the URL and manipulate the final URL used for validation.

This allows crafting URLs where the validated string differs from the actual requested resource, enabling loading images from unintended domains or paths.

Details

Thumbor signs URLs using HMAC-SHA1 to prevent abuse such as loading arbitrary external images or invoking filters without authorization.

During request validation, Thumbor removes the signature from the request URL before recalculating the HMAC. The relevant code:

url_signature = self.context.request.hash
if url_signature:
    signer = self.context.modules.url_signer(
        self.context.server.security_key
    )

    try:
        quoted_hash = quote(self.context.request.hash)
    except KeyError:
        self._error(400, f"Invalid hash: {self.context.request.hash}")
        return

    url_to_validate = url.replace(
        f"/{self.context.request.hash}/", ""
    ).replace(f"/{quoted_hash}/", "")

    valid = signer.validate(
        unquote(url_signature).encode(), url_to_validate
    )

The issue is that .replace() removes every occurrence of the substring in the URL, not just the first one.

Because the signature itself appears in the URL, an attacker can inject additional copies of the signature elsewhere in the path. When Thumbor performs .replace(), these extra occurrences are also removed, resulting in a different url_to_validate than the original request.

Example

Valid request:

/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po_dzOrBhCDrXLc=/300x200/s3.glbimg.com/v1/.../image.jpg

By injecting the same hash inside the URL:

/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po_dzOrBhCDrXLc=/300x200/s3.glbimg.co/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po_dzOrBhCDrXLc=/m/v1/.../image.jpg

After .replace() removes all occurrences of the hash, the URL used for validation differs from the effective request path. This allows manipulation of the upstream host or path.

Further manipulation is possible due to the second .replace() for the URL-encoded hash (%3D), enabling more precise path manipulation.

Example:

/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po_dzOrBhCDrXLc=/300x200/s3.glbimg.com/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po_dzOrBhCDrXLc%3D/ddoyYVYUbDf6Po/v1/...

Impact

This behavior may allow attackers to:

  • Bypass HMAC URL validation
  • Load images from arbitrary domains
  • Abuse Thumbor deployments as an open proxy / image fetcher
  • Circumvent domain restrictions intended by the signed URL mechanism

Root Cause

Use of .replace() without limiting the number of replacements when removing the signature from the URL.

Since the signature is part of the request path, using a global replacement allows attackers to place additional occurrences of the same substring to influence the validated string.

Suggested Fix

Remove only the first occurrence of the signature or explicitly parse the URL components instead of performing global string replacement.

Example:

url.replace(f"/{self.context.request.hash}/", "", 1)

Alternatively, reconstruct the unsigned URL deterministically from the parsed request components.

References

@marcelometal marcelometal published to thumbor/thumbor Jun 10, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 31, 2026
Reviewed Jul 31, 2026
Last updated Sep 30, 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
High
Availability
Low

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:H/A:L

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.
(27th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-53501

GHSA ID

GHSA-mw3h-qjxj-6xg9

Source code

Credits

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