CVE-2022-3215
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-3215
NIOHTTP1 and projects using it for generating HTTP responses can be subject to a HTTP Response Injection attack. This occurs when a HTTP/1.1 server accepts user generated input from an incoming request and reflects it into a HTTP/1.1 response header in some form. A malicious user can add newlines to their input (usually in encoded form) and "inject" those newlines into the returned HTTP response. This capability allows users to work around security headers and HTTP/1.1 framing headers by injecting entirely false responses or other new headers. The injected false responses may also be treated as the response to subsequent requests, which can lead to XSS, cache poisoning, and a number of other flaws. • https://github.com/apple/swift-nio/security/advisories/GHSA-7fj7-39wj-c64f • CWE-74: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') CWE-113: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting') •
CVE-2019-9518 – Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a flood of empty frames, potentially leading to a denial of service
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2019-9518
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a flood of empty frames, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of frames with an empty payload and without the end-of-stream flag. These frames can be DATA, HEADERS, CONTINUATION and/or PUSH_PROMISE. The peer spends time processing each frame disproportionate to attack bandwidth. This can consume excess CPU. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00032.html http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2019/Aug/16 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2925 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2939 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2955 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3892 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:4352 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:0727 • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling •
CVE-2019-9512 – Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to ping floods, potentially leading to a denial of service
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2019-9512
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to ping floods, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends continual pings to an HTTP/2 peer, causing the peer to build an internal queue of responses. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. Algunas implementaciones de HTTP / 2 son vulnerables a las inundaciones de ping, lo que puede conducir a una denegación de servicio. El atacante envía pings continuos a un par HTTP / 2, haciendo que el par construya una cola interna de respuestas. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-08/msg00076.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00002.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00011.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00021.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00032.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09 • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption •
CVE-2019-9516 – Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2019-9516
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of headers with a 0-length header name and 0-length header value, optionally Huffman encoded into 1-byte or greater headers. Some implementations allocate memory for these headers and keep the allocation alive until the session dies. This can consume excess memory. Algunas implementaciones de HTTP / 2 son vulnerables a una fuga de encabezado, lo que puede conducir a una denegación de servicio. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00032.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00035.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00014.html http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2019/Aug/16 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2745 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2746 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2775 https • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling •
CVE-2019-9513 – Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2019-9513
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker creates multiple request streams and continually shuffles the priority of the streams in a way that causes substantial churn to the priority tree. This can consume excess CPU. Algunas implementaciones de HTTP / 2 son vulnerables a los bucles de recursos, lo que puede conducir a una denegación de servicio. El atacante crea múltiples flujos de solicitud y baraja continuamente la prioridad de los flujos de una manera que provoca un cambio considerable en el árbol de prioridad. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00032.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00035.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00003.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00005.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00014.html https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:2692 https:/ • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption •