CWE-770
AllowedAllocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Abstraction: Base · Status: Incomplete
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
3030 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-HXCG-77V3-QX52
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-12 18:31 – Updated: 2026-01-28 21:31If an attacker causes kdcproxy to connect to an attacker-controlled KDC server (e.g. through server-side request forgery), they can exploit the fact that kdcproxy does not enforce bounds on TCP response length to conduct a denial-of-service attack. While receiving the KDC's response, kdcproxy copies the entire buffered stream into a new buffer on each recv() call, even when the transfer is incomplete, causing excessive memory allocation and CPU usage. Additionally, kdcproxy accepts incoming response chunks as long as the received data length is not exactly equal to the length indicated in the response header, even when individual chunks or the total buffer exceed the maximum length of a Kerberos message. This allows an attacker to send unbounded data until the connection timeout is reached (approximately 12 seconds), exhausting server memory or CPU resources. Multiple concurrent requests can cause accept queue overflow, denying service to legitimate clients.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-59089"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-12T17:15:38Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "If an attacker causes kdcproxy to connect to an attacker-controlled KDC server (e.g. through server-side request forgery), they can exploit the fact that kdcproxy does not enforce bounds on TCP response length to conduct a denial-of-service attack. While receiving the KDC\u0027s response, kdcproxy copies the entire buffered stream into a new\nbuffer on each recv() call, even when the transfer is incomplete, causing excessive memory allocation and CPU usage. Additionally, kdcproxy accepts incoming response chunks as long as the received data length is not exactly equal to the length indicated in the response\nheader, even when individual chunks or the total buffer exceed the maximum length of a Kerberos message. This allows an attacker to send unbounded data until the connection timeout is reached (approximately 12 seconds), exhausting server memory or CPU resources. Multiple concurrent requests can cause accept queue overflow, denying service to legitimate clients.",
"id": "GHSA-hxcg-77v3-qx52",
"modified": "2026-01-28T21:31:17Z",
"published": "2025-11-12T18:31:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59089"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/latchset/kdcproxy/pull/68"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/latchset/kdcproxy/commit/c7675365aa20be11f03247966336c7613cac84e1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2393958"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-59089"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:22982"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21821"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21820"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21819"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21818"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21806"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21748"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21448"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21142"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21141"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21140"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21139"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:21138"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HXW6-PFP4-6VC8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-08 00:31 – Updated: 2024-10-08 00:31Improper resource management in firmware of some Solidigm DC Products may allow an attacker to potentially enable denial of service.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-47969"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-07T22:15:04Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper resource management in firmware of some Solidigm DC Products may allow an attacker to potentially enable denial of service.",
"id": "GHSA-hxw6-pfp4-6vc8",
"modified": "2024-10-08T00:31:40Z",
"published": "2024-10-08T00:31:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47969"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.solidigm.com/support-page/support-security.htmlhttps:"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J23X-W7M9-8C47
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-08 21:31 – Updated: 2024-04-04 03:52The issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in macOS Ventura 13.3, macOS Monterey 12.6.4, macOS Big Sur 11.7.5. A remote user may be able to cause unexpected system termination or corrupt kernel memory
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-27958"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-08T20:15:18Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in macOS Ventura 13.3, macOS Monterey 12.6.4, macOS Big Sur 11.7.5. A remote user may be able to cause unexpected system termination or corrupt kernel memory",
"id": "GHSA-j23x-w7m9-8c47",
"modified": "2024-04-04T03:52:07Z",
"published": "2023-05-08T21:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-27958"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213670"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213675"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213677"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1689"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J254-M7H5-8JRJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-09 09:31 – Updated: 2024-11-18 16:26A vulnerability has been identified in Parasolid V35.1 (All versions < V35.1.254), Parasolid V36.0 (All versions < V36.0.207), Parasolid V36.1 (All versions < V36.1.147). The affected application contains a stack exhaustion vulnerability while parsing a specially crafted X_T file. This could allow an attacker to cause denial of service condition.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-26276"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-09T09:15:24Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been identified in Parasolid V35.1 (All versions \u003c V35.1.254), Parasolid V36.0 (All versions \u003c V36.0.207), Parasolid V36.1 (All versions \u003c V36.1.147). The affected application contains a stack exhaustion vulnerability while parsing a specially crafted X_T file. This could allow an attacker to cause denial of service condition.",
"id": "GHSA-j254-m7h5-8jrj",
"modified": "2024-11-18T16:26:39Z",
"published": "2024-04-09T09:31:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-26276"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/html/ssa-222019.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/html/ssa-771940.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"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/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-J26C-8P6M-GPFJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-27 09:31 – Updated: 2026-06-30 03:36Sending "NOOP (((...)))" command with 4000 parenthesis open+close results in ~1MB extra memory usage. Longer commands will result in client disconnection. This 1 MB can be left allocated for longer time periods by not sending the command ending LF. So attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Install fixed version, there is no other remediation. No publicly available exploits are known.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27857"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-27T09:16:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Sending \"NOOP (((...)))\" command with 4000 parenthesis open+close results in ~1MB extra memory usage. Longer commands will result in client disconnection. This 1 MB can be left allocated for longer time periods by not sending the command ending LF. So attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Attacker could connect possibly from even a single IP and create 1000 connections to allocate 1 GB of memory, which would likely result in reaching VSZ limit and killing the process and its other proxied connections. Install fixed version, there is no other remediation. No publicly available exploits are known.",
"id": "GHSA-j26c-8p6m-gpfj",
"modified": "2026-06-30T03:36:03Z",
"published": "2026-03-27T09:31:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-27857.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://documentation.open-xchange.com/dovecot/security/advisories/csaf/2026/oxdc-adv-2026-0001.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2452179"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-27857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26564"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:19455"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:19453"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:19364"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:19149"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:18053"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17630"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17628"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17626"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17625"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:17602"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:13857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:13830"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:13498"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J33C-MRWQ-FPRW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-11-01 19:00 – Updated: 2025-05-05 18:32Xenstore: guests can let run xenstored out of memory T[his CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] Malicious guests can cause xenstored to allocate vast amounts of memory, eventually resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) of xenstored. There are multiple ways how guests can cause large memory allocations in xenstored: - - by issuing new requests to xenstored without reading the responses, causing the responses to be buffered in memory - - by causing large number of watch events to be generated via setting up multiple xenstore watches and then e.g. deleting many xenstore nodes below the watched path - - by creating as many nodes as allowed with the maximum allowed size and path length in as many transactions as possible - - by accessing many nodes inside a transaction
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-42318"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-11-01T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Xenstore: guests can let run xenstored out of memory T[his CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] Malicious guests can cause xenstored to allocate vast amounts of memory, eventually resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) of xenstored. There are multiple ways how guests can cause large memory allocations in xenstored: - - by issuing new requests to xenstored without reading the responses, causing the responses to be buffered in memory - - by causing large number of watch events to be generated via setting up multiple xenstore watches and then e.g. deleting many xenstore nodes below the watched path - - by creating as many nodes as allowed with the maximum allowed size and path length in as many transactions as possible - - by accessing many nodes inside a transaction",
"id": "GHSA-j33c-mrwq-fprw",
"modified": "2025-05-05T18:32:26Z",
"published": "2022-11-01T19:00:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-42318"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YTMITQBGC23MSDHUCAPCVGLMVXIBXQTQ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YZVXG7OOOXCX6VIPEMLFDPIPUTFAYWPE"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZLI2NPNEH7CNJO3VZGQNOI4M4EWLNKPZ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YTMITQBGC23MSDHUCAPCVGLMVXIBXQTQ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YZVXG7OOOXCX6VIPEMLFDPIPUTFAYWPE"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZLI2NPNEH7CNJO3VZGQNOI4M4EWLNKPZ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2022/dsa-5272"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://xenbits.xenproject.org/xsa/advisory-326.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-326.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J3CP-7WH4-9F6C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-15 15:30 – Updated: 2026-03-31 18:31When a BIG-IP APM Access Policy is configured on a virtual server, undisclosed traffic can cause TMM to terminate.
Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-53521"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-121",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-15T14:15:48Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "When a BIG-IP APM Access Policy is configured on a virtual server, undisclosed traffic can cause TMM to terminate.\u00a0\u00a0\n\nNote: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.",
"id": "GHSA-j3cp-7wh4-9f6c",
"modified": "2026-03-31T18:31:25Z",
"published": "2025-10-15T15:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-53521"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K000156741"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2025-53521"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-J3FP-8J72-VF4G
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-26 15:30 – Updated: 2026-04-14 21:31A vulnerability has been identified in CPCI85 Central Processing/Communication (All versions < V26.10), RTUM85 RTU Base (All versions < V26.10). The affected application contains denial-of-service (DoS) vulnerability. The remote operation mode is susceptible to a resource exhaustion condition when subjected to a high volume of requests. Sending multiple requests can exhaust resources, preventing parameterization and requiring a reset or reboot to restore functionality.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27663"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-26T15:16:34Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been identified in CPCI85 Central Processing/Communication (All versions \u003c V26.10), RTUM85\u00a0RTU Base (All versions \u003c V26.10). The affected application contains denial-of-service (DoS) vulnerability. The remote operation mode is susceptible to a resource exhaustion condition when subjected to a high volume of requests. Sending multiple requests can exhaust resources, preventing parameterization and requiring a reset or reboot to restore functionality.",
"id": "GHSA-j3fp-8j72-vf4g",
"modified": "2026-04-14T21:31:41Z",
"published": "2026-03-26T15:30:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27663"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/html/ssa-246443.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2026/Apr/6"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-J3G3-5QV5-52MJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-28 14:17 – Updated: 2025-11-21 22:18Summary
There is a possibility for denial of service by memory exhaustion when net-imap reads server responses. At any time while the client is connected, a malicious server can send can send a "literal" byte count, which is automatically read by the client's receiver thread. The response reader immediately allocates memory for the number of bytes indicated by the server response.
This should not be an issue when securely connecting to trusted IMAP servers that are well-behaved. It can affect insecure connections and buggy, untrusted, or compromised servers (for example, connecting to a user supplied hostname).
Details
The IMAP protocol allows "literal" strings to be sent in responses, prefixed with their size in curly braces (e.g. {1234567890}\r\n). When Net::IMAP receives a response containing a literal string, it calls IO#read with that size. When called with a size, IO#read immediately allocates memory to buffer the entire string before processing continues. The server does not need to send any more data. There is no limit on the size of literals that will be accepted.
Fix
Upgrade
Users should upgrade to net-imap 0.5.7 or later. A configurable max_response_size limit has been added to Net::IMAP's response reader. The max_response_size limit has also been backported to net-imap 0.2.5, 0.3.9, and 0.4.20.
To set a global value for max_response_size, users must upgrade to net-imap ~> 0.4.20, or > 0.5.7.
Configuration
To avoid backward compatibility issues for secure connections to trusted well-behaved servers, the default max_response_size for net-imap 0.5.7 is very high (512MiB), and the default max_response_size for net-imap ~> 0.4.20, ~> 0.3.9, and 0.2.5 is nil (unlimited).
When connecting to untrusted servers or using insecure connections, a much lower max_response_size should be used.
# Set the global max_response_size (only ~> v0.4.20, > 0.5.7)
Net::IMAP.config.max_response_size = 256 << 10 # 256 KiB
# Set when creating the connection
imap = Net::IMAP.new(hostname, ssl: true,
max_response_size: 16 << 10) # 16 KiB
# Set after creating the connection
imap.max_response_size = 256 << 20 # 256 KiB
# flush currently waiting read, to ensure the new setting is loaded
imap.noop
Please Note: max_response_size only limits the size per response. It does not prevent a flood of individual responses and it does not limit how many unhandled responses may be stored on the responses hash. Users are responsible for adding response handlers to prune excessive unhandled responses.
Compatibility with lower max_response_size
A lower max_response_size may cause a few commands which legitimately return very large responses to raise an exception and close the connection. The max_response_size could be temporarily set to a higher value, but paginated or limited versions of commands should be used whenever possible. For example, to fetch message bodies:
imap.max_response_size = 256 << 20 # 256 KiB
imap.noop # flush currently waiting read
# fetch a message in 252KiB chunks
size = imap.uid_fetch(uid, "RFC822.SIZE").first.rfc822_size
limit = 252 << 10
message = ((0..size) % limit).each_with_object("") {|offset, str|
str << imap.uid_fetch(uid, "BODY.PEEK[]<#{offset}.#{limit}>").first.message(offset:)
}
imap.max_response_size = 16 << 20 # 16 KiB
imap.noop # flush currently waiting read
References
- PR to introduce max_response_size: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/444
- Specific commit: 0ae8576c1 - lib/net/imap/response_reader.rb
- Backport to 0.4: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/445
- Backport to 0.3: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/446
- Backport to 0.2: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/447
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.5.6"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "net-imap"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.5.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.5.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.4.19"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "net-imap"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.4.20"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.3.8"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "net-imap"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.3.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.3.9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.2.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "net-imap"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.2.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-43857"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-405",
"CWE-770",
"CWE-789"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-04-28T14:17:32Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-28T16:15:33Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is a possibility for denial of service by memory exhaustion when `net-imap` reads server responses. At any time while the client is connected, a malicious server can send can send a \"literal\" byte count, which is automatically read by the client\u0027s receiver thread. The response reader immediately allocates memory for the number of bytes indicated by the server response.\n\nThis should not be an issue when securely connecting to trusted IMAP servers that are well-behaved. It can affect insecure connections and buggy, untrusted, or compromised servers (for example, connecting to a user supplied hostname).\n\n### Details\n\nThe IMAP protocol allows \"literal\" strings to be sent in responses, prefixed with their size in curly braces (e.g. `{1234567890}\\r\\n`). When `Net::IMAP` receives a response containing a literal string, it calls `IO#read` with that size. When called with a size, `IO#read` immediately allocates memory to buffer the entire string before processing continues. The server does not need to send any more data. There is no limit on the size of literals that will be accepted.\n\n### Fix\n#### Upgrade\nUsers should upgrade to `net-imap` 0.5.7 or later. A configurable `max_response_size` limit has been added to `Net::IMAP`\u0027s response reader. The `max_response_size` limit has also been backported to `net-imap` 0.2.5, 0.3.9, and 0.4.20.\n\nTo set a global value for `max_response_size`, users must upgrade to `net-imap` ~\u003e 0.4.20, or \u003e 0.5.7.\n\n#### Configuration\n\nTo avoid backward compatibility issues for secure connections to trusted well-behaved servers, the default `max_response_size` for `net-imap` 0.5.7 is _very high_ (512MiB), and the default `max_response_size` for `net-imap` ~\u003e 0.4.20, ~\u003e 0.3.9, and 0.2.5 is `nil` (unlimited).\n\nWhen connecting to untrusted servers or using insecure connections, a much lower `max_response_size` should be used.\n```ruby\n# Set the global max_response_size (only ~\u003e v0.4.20, \u003e 0.5.7)\nNet::IMAP.config.max_response_size = 256 \u003c\u003c 10 # 256 KiB\n\n# Set when creating the connection\nimap = Net::IMAP.new(hostname, ssl: true,\n max_response_size: 16 \u003c\u003c 10) # 16 KiB\n\n# Set after creating the connection\nimap.max_response_size = 256 \u003c\u003c 20 # 256 KiB\n# flush currently waiting read, to ensure the new setting is loaded\nimap.noop\n```\n\n_**Please Note:**_ `max_response_size` only limits the size _per response_. It does not prevent a flood of individual responses and it does not limit how many unhandled responses may be stored on the responses hash. Users are responsible for adding response handlers to prune excessive unhandled responses.\n\n#### Compatibility with lower `max_response_size`\n\nA lower `max_response_size` may cause a few commands which legitimately return very large responses to raise an exception and close the connection. The `max_response_size` could be temporarily set to a higher value, but paginated or limited versions of commands should be used whenever possible. For example, to fetch message bodies:\n\n```ruby\nimap.max_response_size = 256 \u003c\u003c 20 # 256 KiB\nimap.noop # flush currently waiting read\n\n# fetch a message in 252KiB chunks\nsize = imap.uid_fetch(uid, \"RFC822.SIZE\").first.rfc822_size\nlimit = 252 \u003c\u003c 10\nmessage = ((0..size) % limit).each_with_object(\"\") {|offset, str|\n str \u003c\u003c imap.uid_fetch(uid, \"BODY.PEEK[]\u003c#{offset}.#{limit}\u003e\").first.message(offset:)\n}\n\nimap.max_response_size = 16 \u003c\u003c 20 # 16 KiB\nimap.noop # flush currently waiting read\n```\n\n### References\n\n* PR to introduce max_response_size: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/444\n * Specific commit: [0ae8576c1 - lib/net/imap/response_reader.rb](https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/444/commits/0ae8576c1a90bcd9573f81bdad4b4b824642d105#diff-53721cb4d9c3fb86b95cc8476ca2df90968ad8c481645220c607034399151462)\n* Backport to 0.4: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/445\n* Backport to 0.3: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/446\n* Backport to 0.2: https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/447",
"id": "GHSA-j3g3-5qv5-52mj",
"modified": "2025-11-21T22:18:03Z",
"published": "2025-04-28T14:17:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/security/advisories/GHSA-j3g3-5qv5-52mj"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/442"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/444"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/444/commits/0ae8576c1a90bcd9573f81bdad4b4b824642d105#diff-53721cb4d9c3fb86b95cc8476ca2df90968ad8c481645220c607034399151462"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/445"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/446"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap/pull/447"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/ruby/net-imap"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/net-imap/CVE-2025-43857.yml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "net-imap rubygem vulnerable to possible DoS by memory exhaustion"
}
GHSA-J3J3-JRFH-CM2W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 02:06 – Updated: 2024-09-18 16:03The utils.html.strip_tags function in Django 1.6.x before 1.6.11, 1.7.x before 1.7.7, and 1.8.x before 1.8c1, when using certain versions of Python, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) by increasing the length of the input string.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Django"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.6"
},
{
"fixed": "1.6.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Django"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.7"
},
{
"fixed": "1.7.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Django"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.8a1"
},
{
"fixed": "1.8c1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-2316"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-04-29T11:21:09Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2015-03-25T14:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The `utils.html.strip_tags` function in Django 1.6.x before 1.6.11, 1.7.x before 1.7.7, and 1.8.x before 1.8c1, when using certain versions of Python, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) by increasing the length of the input string.",
"id": "GHSA-j3j3-jrfh-cm2w",
"modified": "2024-09-18T16:03:03Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T02:06:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-2316"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/django/django/commit/5447709a571cd5d95971f1d5d21d4a7edcf85bbd"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/django/django/commit/b6b3cb9899214a23ebb0f4ebf0e0b300b0ee524f"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/django/django/commit/e63363f8e075fa8d66326ad6a1cc3391cc95cd97"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/django/django"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/django/PYSEC-2015-18.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20200229033201/http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/73322"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/mar/18/security-releases"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2015-April/155421.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2015-04/msg00001.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/bulletinapr2015-2511959.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-2539-1"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Django Denial-of-service possibility with strip_tags"
}
Mitigation
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Mitigation
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Mitigation
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, and it will help the administrator to identify who is committing the abuse. 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 MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation
- 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 can be difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply requires more resources on the part of the attacker.
- recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, typically by using increasing time delays
- uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Mitigation
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
Mitigation MIT-38.1
- If the program must fail, ensure that it fails gracefully (fails closed). There may be a temptation to simply let the program fail poorly in cases such as low memory conditions, but an attacker may be able to assert control before the software has fully exited. Alternately, an uncontrolled failure could cause cascading problems with other downstream components; for example, the program could send a signal to a downstream process so the process immediately knows that a problem has occurred and has a better chance of recovery.
- Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.
Mitigation MIT-47
Strategy: Resource Limitation
- Use quotas or other resource-limiting settings provided by the operating system or environment. For example, when managing system resources in POSIX, setrlimit() can be used to set limits for certain types of resources, and getrlimit() can determine how many resources are available. However, these functions are not available on all operating systems.
- When the current levels get close to the maximum that is defined for the application (see CWE-770), then limit the allocation of further resources to privileged users; alternately, begin releasing resources for less-privileged users. While this mitigation may protect the system from attack, it will not necessarily stop attackers from adversely impacting other users.
- Ensure that the application performs the appropriate error checks and error handling in case resources become unavailable (CWE-703).
CAPEC-125: Flooding
An adversary consumes the resources of a target by rapidly engaging in a large number of interactions with the target. This type of attack generally exposes a weakness in rate limiting or flow. When successful this attack prevents legitimate users from accessing the service and can cause the target to crash. This attack differs from resource depletion through leaks or allocations in that the latter attacks do not rely on the volume of requests made to the target but instead focus on manipulation of the target's operations. The key factor in a flooding attack is the number of requests the adversary can make in a given period of time. The greater this number, the more likely an attack is to succeed against a given target.
CAPEC-130: Excessive Allocation
An adversary causes the target to allocate excessive resources to servicing the attackers' request, thereby reducing the resources available for legitimate services and degrading or denying services. Usually, this attack focuses on memory allocation, but any finite resource on the target could be the attacked, including bandwidth, processing cycles, or other resources. This attack does not attempt to force this allocation through a large number of requests (that would be Resource Depletion through Flooding) but instead uses one or a small number of requests that are carefully formatted to force the target to allocate excessive resources to service this request(s). Often this attack takes advantage of a bug in the target to cause the target to allocate resources vastly beyond what would be needed for a normal request.
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-197: Exponential Data Expansion
An adversary submits data to a target application which contains nested exponential data expansion to produce excessively large output. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. However, this capability can be abused to create excessive demands on a processor's CPU and memory. A small number of nested expansions can result in an exponential growth in demands on memory.
CAPEC-229: Serialized Data Parameter Blowup
This attack exploits certain serialized data parsers (e.g., XML, YAML, etc.) which manage data in an inefficient manner. The attacker crafts an serialized data file with multiple configuration parameters in the same dataset. In a vulnerable parser, this results in a denial of service condition where CPU resources are exhausted because of the parsing algorithm. The weakness being exploited is tied to parser implementation and not language specific.
CAPEC-230: Serialized Data with Nested Payloads
Applications often need to transform data in and out of a data format (e.g., XML and YAML) by using a parser. It may be possible for an adversary to inject data that may have an adverse effect on the parser when it is being processed. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. By nesting these structures, causing the data to be repeatedly substituted, an adversary can cause the parser to consume more resources while processing, causing excessive memory consumption and CPU utilization.
CAPEC-231: Oversized Serialized Data Payloads
An adversary injects oversized serialized data payloads into a parser during data processing to produce adverse effects upon the parser such as exhausting system resources and arbitrary code execution.
CAPEC-469: HTTP DoS
An attacker performs flooding at the HTTP level to bring down only a particular web application rather than anything listening on a TCP/IP connection. This denial of service attack requires substantially fewer packets to be sent which makes DoS harder to detect. This is an equivalent of SYN flood in HTTP. The idea is to keep the HTTP session alive indefinitely and then repeat that hundreds of times. This attack targets resource depletion weaknesses in web server software. The web server will wait to attacker's responses on the initiated HTTP sessions while the connection threads are being exhausted.
CAPEC-482: TCP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the TCP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service. These attacks exploit the weakness within the TCP protocol where there is some state information for the connection the server needs to maintain. This often involves the use of TCP SYN messages.
CAPEC-486: UDP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the UDP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming the available network bandwidth. Additionally, firewalls often open a port for each UDP connection destined for a service with an open UDP port, meaning the firewalls in essence save the connection state thus the high packet nature of a UDP flood can also overwhelm resources allocated to the firewall. UDP attacks can also target services like DNS or VoIP which utilize these protocols. Additionally, due to the session-less nature of the UDP protocol, the source of a packet is easily spoofed making it difficult to find the source of the attack.
CAPEC-487: ICMP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the ICMP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming the available network bandwidth. A typical attack involves a victim server receiving ICMP packets at a high rate from a wide range of source addresses. Additionally, due to the session-less nature of the ICMP protocol, the source of a packet is easily spoofed making it difficult to find the source of the attack.
CAPEC-488: HTTP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the HTTP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming resources at the application layer such as web services and their infrastructure. These attacks use legitimate session-based HTTP GET requests designed to consume large amounts of a server's resources. Since these are legitimate sessions this attack is very difficult to detect.
CAPEC-489: SSL Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the SSL protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming all the available resources on the server side. These attacks take advantage of the asymmetric relationship between the processing power used by the client and the processing power used by the server to create a secure connection. In this manner the attacker can make a large number of HTTPS requests on a low provisioned machine to tie up a disproportionately large number of resources on the server. The clients then continue to keep renegotiating the SSL connection. When multiplied by a large number of attacking machines, this attack can result in a crash or loss of service to legitimate users.
CAPEC-490: Amplification
An adversary may execute an amplification where the size of a response is far greater than that of the request that generates it. The goal of this attack is to use a relatively few resources to create a large amount of traffic against a target server. To execute this attack, an adversary send a request to a 3rd party service, spoofing the source address to be that of the target server. The larger response that is generated by the 3rd party service is then sent to the target server. By sending a large number of initial requests, the adversary can generate a tremendous amount of traffic directed at the target. The greater the discrepancy in size between the initial request and the final payload delivered to the target increased the effectiveness of this attack.
CAPEC-491: Quadratic Data Expansion
An adversary exploits macro-like substitution to cause a denial of service situation due to excessive memory being allocated to fully expand the data. The result of this denial of service could cause the application to freeze or crash. This involves defining a very large entity and using it multiple times in a single entity substitution. CAPEC-197 is a similar attack pattern, but it is easier to discover and defend against. This attack pattern does not perform multi-level substitution and therefore does not obviously appear to consume extensive resources.
CAPEC-493: SOAP Array Blowup
An adversary may execute an attack on a web service that uses SOAP messages in communication. By sending a very large SOAP array declaration to the web service, the attacker forces the web service to allocate space for the array elements before they are parsed by the XML parser. The attacker message is typically small in size containing a large array declaration of say 1,000,000 elements and a couple of array elements. This attack targets exhaustion of the memory resources of the web service.
CAPEC-494: TCP Fragmentation
An adversary may execute a TCP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of avoiding filtering rules of network controls, by attempting to fragment the TCP packet such that the headers flag field is pushed into the second fragment which typically is not filtered.
CAPEC-495: UDP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a UDP Fragmentation attack against a target server in an attempt to consume resources such as bandwidth and CPU. IP fragmentation occurs when an IP datagram is larger than the MTU of the route the datagram has to traverse. Typically the attacker will use large UDP packets over 1500 bytes of data which forces fragmentation as ethernet MTU is 1500 bytes. This attack is a variation on a typical UDP flood but it enables more network bandwidth to be consumed with fewer packets. Additionally it has the potential to consume server CPU resources and fill memory buffers associated with the processing and reassembling of fragmented packets.
CAPEC-496: ICMP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a ICMP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of consuming resources or causing a crash. The attacker crafts a large number of identical fragmented IP packets containing a portion of a fragmented ICMP message. The attacker these sends these messages to a target host which causes the host to become non-responsive. Another vector may be sending a fragmented ICMP message to a target host with incorrect sizes in the header which causes the host to hang.
CAPEC-528: XML Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using XML messages with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a web service. These attacks are accomplished by sending a large number of XML based requests and letting the service attempt to parse each one. In many cases this type of an attack will result in a XML Denial of Service (XDoS) due to an application becoming unstable, freezing, or crashing.