♻️ Refactor logic to handle OpenAPI and Swagger UI escaping data#14986
Merged
♻️ Refactor logic to handle OpenAPI and Swagger UI escaping data#14986
Conversation
YuriiMotov
added a commit
to YuriiMotov/fastapi
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
♻️ Refactor logic to handle OpenAPI and Swagger UI escaping data
OpenAPI, do not store
root_pathin servers: the only way this could be a problem is if there was a misconfigured proxy that somehow allowed an attacker client to setx-forwarded-*headers and passed them along. For a proxy (or server) to do this, it normally has to be intentionally/explicitly misconfigured. But again, doesn't hurt to have it there.Escape Swagger UI configs: I wouldn't consider this really important, the Swagger UI logic takes only data from the same developer building the app, I don't see a feasible scenario where this could be a problem, but probably also doesn't hurt much to have it there.
I received several "security reports" with this, I suspect some automated scanning tool that checks any JSON inside of HTML or similar. I don't consider these security issues, but also think it's probably fine to have these changes.