conduit-hyper up to 0.4.1 hyper::body::to_bytes Content-Length resource consumption
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.3 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability identified as problematic has been detected in conduit-hyper up to 0.4.1. This issue affects the function hyper::body::to_bytes. This manipulation of the argument Content-Length causes resource consumption.
This vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2022-39294. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists.
You should upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability has been found in conduit-hyper up to 0.4.1 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function hyper::body::to_bytes. The manipulation of the argument Content-Length with an unknown input leads to a resource consumption vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-400. The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource, thereby enabling an actor to influence the amount of resources consumed, eventually leading to the exhaustion of available resources. As an impact it is known to affect availability. The summary by CVE is:
conduit-hyper integrates a conduit application with the hyper server. Prior to version 0.4.2, `conduit-hyper` did not check any limit on a request's length before calling [`hyper::body::to_bytes`](https://docs.rs/hyper/latest/hyper/body/fn.to_bytes.html). An attacker could send a malicious request with an abnormally large `Content-Length`, which could lead to a panic if memory allocation failed for that request. In version 0.4.2, `conduit-hyper` sets an internal limit of 128 MiB per request, otherwise returning status 400 ("Bad Request"). This crate is part of the implementation of Rust's [crates.io](https://crates.io/), but that service is not affected due to its existing cloud infrastructure, which already drops such malicious requests. Even with the new limit in place, `conduit-hyper` is not recommended for production use, nor to directly serve the public Internet.
The weakness was disclosed 10/31/2022 as GHSA-9398-5ghf-7pr6. The advisory is shared at github.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2022-39294 since 09/02/2022. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1499 for this issue.
Upgrading to version 0.4.2 eliminates this vulnerability.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.4VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.3
VulDB Base Score: 5.3
VulDB Temp Score: 5.1
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 7.5
CNA Vector (GitHub, Inc.): 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Resource consumptionCWE: CWE-400 / CWE-404
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: conduit-hyper 0.4.2
Timeline
09/02/2022 🔍10/31/2022 🔍
10/31/2022 🔍
10/31/2022 🔍
Sources
Advisory: GHSA-9398-5ghf-7pr6Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2022-39294 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2022-39294
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-212557
Entry
Created: 10/31/2022 21:27Changes: 10/31/2022 21:27 (51)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.