CVE-2018-16470
Description
From CVE.org
There is a possible DoS vulnerability in the multipart parser in Rack before 2.0.6. Specially crafted requests can cause the multipart parser to enter a pathological state, causing the parser to use CPU resources disproportionate to the request size.
Statement
OpenShift Enterprise and Red Hat OpenStack Platform optools both ship rubygem-rack 1.5.2, which is not affected by this flaw.
Red Hat Subscription Asset Manager uses rubygem-rack 1.4.5, and is not affected by this flaw.
Red Hat Update Infrastructure ships rubygem-rack version 1.4.2, which is not affected by this flaw.
Red Hat CloudForms versions 4.5 and 4.6 ship rack version 2.0.3, which is not affected by this flaw; while Red Hat CloudForms version 4.7 ships rack version 2.0.6, which already contains the fix for this flaw.
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert:Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 5.3 | 7.5 | N/A |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | N/A |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Low | N/A |
| Privileges Required | None | None | N/A |
| User Interaction | None | None | N/A |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | N/A |
| Confidentiality | None | None | N/A |
| Integrity Impact | None | None | N/A |
| Availability Impact | Low | High | N/A |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
NVD: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory); DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)
If an attacker can trigger the allocation of the limited resources, but the number or size of the resources is not controlled, then the most common result is denial of service. This would prevent valid users from accessing the product, and it could potentially have an impact on the surrounding environment, i.e., the product may slow down, crash due to unhandled errors, or lock out legitimate users. For example, a memory exhaustion attack against an application could slow down the application as well as its host operating system.
Access Control,Other
Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism; Other
In some cases it may be possible to force the product to "fail open" in the event of resource exhaustion. The state of the product -- and possibly the security functionality - may then be compromised.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
