Vulnerability · CVE-2022-36359
sync 2026-10-24T06:31:10Z
Published Unknown date · sync 2026-10-24T06:31:10Z
Open the advisory
Exploitation likelihood is not on this record for CVE-2022-36359. A missing EPSS score is not a low risk. Compare sync 2026-10-24T06:31:10Z with the linked advisory before you change production.
Gaps on this record
- The stored product name is a package slug. The name on this page is taken from the title (sync 2026-10-24T06:31:10Z).
- No vendor fix or required action is stored. Compare the linked advisory before you change production.
- EPSS is missing. A missing score is not a low risk.
- Severity
- Unknown—
- Known exploitation
- Not in CISA/VulnCheck KEV
- EPSS
- Not in the current FIRST EPSS dataset
- Remediation
- Version ranges on file
- Affected products
- pypi django-sendfile2
Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 does not protect +description: "Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 did not protect against a reflected file download attack in version 0.6.1 and earlier. If the file name used by django-sendfile2 was derived from user input, then it would be possible to perform a such an attack. A new version of django-sendfile2 will be rel
Are you affected?
Enter the version you run. The result uses only the ranges stored on this record.
The check returns affected, not affected, or incomplete. It does not guess a version that is missing from the record.
- pypi django-sendfile2<0.7.0
How to fix CVE-2022-36359
Recommended remediation
Affected version ranges suggest a fixed boundary. Verify against the vendor advisory for your release.
Official advisories
What to do
Three questions, each answered from this record only. Confirm the vendor advisory before you patch.
Should you patch?
Exploitation likelihood is not on this record for CVE-2022-36359. A missing EPSS score is not a low risk. Compare sync 2026-10-24T06:31:10Z with the linked advisory before you change production.
Which versions are affected?
Compare what you have installed with <0.7.0. Compare the installed version with the linked vendor advisory before you change production.
What should an analyst verify?
No weakness class is stored. EPSS is absent from the current FIRST dataset. There is no CISA KEV listing. No Exploit-DB or Metasploit reference is linked. Use the source links for the original advisory.
Code
The project this record applies to. Exploit listings stay in References.
Timeline
Detection, updates, and resolution for this record.
Oct 24, 2026 · GitLab Advisory Database
Detected
Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 does not protect +description: "Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 did not protect against a reflected file download attack in version 0.6.1 and earlier. If the file name used by django-sendfile2 was derived from user input, then it would be possible to perform a such an attack. A new version of django-sendfile2 will be rel
Sources
- GitLab Advisory DatabasePackage advisorypypi/django-sendfile2/GMS-2022-3569.yml
Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 does not protect +description: "Similar to CVE-2022-36359 for Django, django-sendfile2 did not protect against a reflected file download attack in version 0.6.1 and earlier. If the file name used by django-sendfile2 was derived from user input, then it would be possible to perform a such an attack. A new version of django-sendfile2 will be rel
gitlab.com
Freshness
Last verified in this catalog Oct 24, 2026. Significant claims (KEV, EPSS, CVSS, affected ranges) come from the source rows above — open the original publisher for the authoritative advisory.