CVE-2022-41721
Description
A request smuggling attack is possible when using MaxBytesHandler. When using MaxBytesHandler, the body of an HTTP request is not fully consumed. When the server attempts to read HTTP2 frames from the connection, it will instead read the body of the HTTP request, which could be attacker-manipulated to represent arbitrary HTTP2 requests.
Statement
This moderate severity flaw was found in golang.org/x/net/http2/h2c when using MaxBytesHandler. If the handler does not fully read the body of an HTTP request, the server may interpret the remaining request body as HTTP/2 frames. An attacker can craft this body to include arbitrary HTTP/2 frames, enabling request smuggling. This can cause denial of service (DoS) by crashing or disrupting the server’s HTTP/2 handling.
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 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | Network |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Low | Low |
| Privileges Required | None | None | None |
| User Interaction | None | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | None | None | None |
| Integrity Impact | None | None | None |
| Availability Impact | High | High | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity,Non-Repudiation,Access Control
Technical Impact: Unexpected State; Hide Activities; Bypass Protection Mechanism
An attacker could create HTTP messages to exploit a number of weaknesses including 1) the message can trick the web server to associate a URL with another URL's webpage and caching the contents of the webpage (web cache poisoning attack), 2) the message can be structured to bypass the firewall protection mechanisms and gain unauthorized access to a web application, and 3) the message can invoke a script or a page that returns client credentials (similar to a Cross Site Scripting attack).
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
