CWE-770
Weakness 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.
Dimensions
- Behavior-Type: Allocation
- Behavior-Property: Without Limits or Throttling
- Resource-Type: Resources
Mapping guidance
This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.
Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.
Relationships and members
Modes of introduction
OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.
Detection methods
Manual Static Analysis
Manual static analysis can be useful for finding this weakness, but it might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. If denial-of-service is not considered a significant risk, or if there is strong emphasis on consequences such as code execution, then manual analysis may not focus on this weakness at all.
Fuzzing
While fuzzing is typically geared toward finding low-level implementation bugs, it can inadvertently find uncontrolled resource allocation problems. This can occur when the fuzzer generates a large number of test cases but does not restart the targeted product in between test cases. If an individual test case produces a crash, but it does not do so reliably, then an inability to limit resource allocation may be the cause.
When the allocation is directly affected by numeric inputs, then fuzzing may produce indications of this weakness.
Effectiveness: Opportunistic
Automated Dynamic Analysis
Certain automated dynamic analysis techniques may be effective in producing side effects of uncontrolled resource allocation problems, especially with resources such as processes, memory, and connections. The technique may involve generating a large number of requests to the product within a short time frame. Manual analysis is likely required to interpret the results.
Automated Static Analysis
Specialized configuration or tuning may be required to train automated tools to recognize this weakness.
Automated static analysis typically has limited utility in recognizing unlimited allocation problems, except for the missing release of program-independent system resources such as files, sockets, and processes, or unchecked arguments to memory. For system resources, automated static analysis may be able to detect circumstances in which resources are not released after they have expired, or if too much of a resource is requested at once, as can occur with memory. Automated analysis of configuration files may be able to detect settings that do not specify a maximum value.
Automated static analysis tools will not be appropriate for detecting exhaustion of custom resources, such as an intended security policy in which a bulletin board user is only allowed to make a limited number of posts per day.
Notes
Relationship
This entry is different from uncontrolled resource consumption (CWE-400) in that there are other weaknesses that are related to inability to control resource consumption, such as holding on to a resource too long after use, or not correctly keeping track of active resources so that they can be managed and released when they are finished (CWE-771).
Theoretical
Vulnerability theory is largely about how behaviors and resources interact. "Resource exhaustion" can be regarded as either a consequence or an attack, depending on the perspective. This entry is an attempt to reflect one of the underlying weaknesses that enable these attacks (or consequences) to take place.
Content history
Contributed or reviewed taxonomy mappings for ISA/IEC 62443
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Relationships
updated Applicable_Platforms, Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Observed_Examples, References, Time_of_Introduction
updated Common_Consequences, Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Common_Consequences, Potential_Mitigations, References
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Potential_Mitigations
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Relationships
updated Common_Consequences, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Relationships
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Demonstrative_Examples, References, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Potential_Mitigations
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Relationships
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Modes_of_Introduction, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated References
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated Potential_Mitigations, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated Applicable_Platforms, Description, Maintenance_Notes, Potential_Mitigations, Relationship_Notes, Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Observed_Examples
updated Observed_Examples, References
updated Description, Detection_Factors
updated References, Relationships
updated Mapping_Notes
updated Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Common_Consequences, Description, Diagram, Observed_Examples, Potential_Mitigations, References
updated Applicable_Platforms, Relationships, Weakness_Ordinalities
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Dimensions
4410 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-FF3F-86QR-9CV3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-30 15:40 – Updated: 2026-09-30 15:40A denial of service (DoS) vulnerability was identified in @angular/router when Server-Side Rendering (SSR) is enabled on Node.js (V8).
When @angular/router parses incoming request URLs, it extracts path segments, matrix parameters, and child outlets into plain JavaScript objects (Record<string, string>). When matrix parameter names or outlet names are numeric strings (such as /a;990;2522), the V8 JavaScript engine interprets them as array-indexed properties rather than named properties.
Under V8's internal property-storage heuristics, setting numeric keys on an initially empty object causes V8 to allocate a dense array backing store (HOLEY_ELEMENTS) sized to the maximum index rather than falling back to sparse dictionary storage. Specifically, assigning sequential or moderately large numeric keys (like 990 followed by 2522) causes V8 to allocate a contiguous backing store of ~2,522 pointers (~20 KB to 25 KB of heap) for a single 11-byte segment.
Because each segment in a URL path allocates its own independent parameters object, an attacker can craft URLs with repeated numeric matrix parameters to achieve an asymmetric memory amplification factor of approximately ~350x.
Impact
Successful exploitation allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to exhaust the Node.js old-space heap with modest request volume, terminating the SSR worker with an unrecoverable JavaScript heap out of memory fatal error and causing a Denial of Service.
- High Amplification: A single 11-byte segment (
/a;990;2522) consumes ~20 KB–25 KB of V8 heap. - Low Concurrency Required:
- With 8 KB request paths (~740 segments, within default Nginx 8 KB buffer limits), as few as 12–22 concurrent requests crash a 256 MiB–512 MiB Node.js SSR worker.
- With smaller 1 KB–2 KB request paths (~90–180 segments), a burst of ~50–100 concurrent requests achieves the same heap exhaustion.
- Client-side SPAs Unaffected: Pure client-side Angular applications (Single Page Applications without SSR) are not vulnerable, as local browser memory consumption does not cross a security boundary.
Attack Preconditions & Vulnerable Configurations
An application is affected only if all of the following conditions are met:
- SSR Enabled: The application runs in a Server-Side Rendering environment powered by Node.js / V8.
- Direct Router Parsing: User-controlled request URLs are parsed by
@angular/routerduring SSR. - No Reverse-Proxy Semicolon/Segment Filtering: Upstream reverse proxies (Nginx, Cloudflare, ALB) forward URLs containing semicolons (
;) and multiple path segments without stripping or rejecting them.
Exploit Payload Example
An attacker sends concurrent HTTP requests with repeated numeric matrix parameters:
GET /a;990;2522/a;990;2522/a;990;2522/... HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
Even with paths under 2 KB, overlapping requests during SSR will rapidly consume the V8 heap until the process crashes.
Patches
The issue is resolved by updating @angular/router to enforce V8 dictionary elements storage (setUrlDerivedKey) for numeric URL-derived keys (index >= 32). This prevents V8 from allocating oversized contiguous array backing stores while preserving route matching, parameter values, and component input bindings.
22.2.021.2.2420.3.32
Workarounds & Mitigations
If you cannot immediately upgrade to a patched version, apply one of the following mitigations at your edge or reverse proxy:
- Block or Sanitize Matrix Parameters at the Reverse Proxy:
Configure your reverse proxy (e.g., Nginx, Cloudflare, or AWS WAF) to reject or strip semicolons (;) in request paths before forwarding requests to the Angular SSR service:nginx # Nginx example: reject requests containing matrix parameters if ($uri ~* ";") { return 400; } - Enforce Strict Path Segment Limits:
Reject requests with excessive path depth (e.g., more than 20–30 segments). - Increase Node.js Old Space:
Increase--max-old-space-size(e.g., to 2048 or 4096 MB) to increase the concurrency threshold required to exhaust memory, though this does not fully eliminate the vulnerability under sustained traffic.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@angular/router"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "22.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "22.2.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@angular/router"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "21.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "21.2.24"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@angular/router"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "20.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "20.3.32"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@angular/router"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "19.2.25"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-101896"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-09-30T15:40:47Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A denial of service (DoS) vulnerability was identified in `@angular/router` when Server-Side Rendering (SSR) is enabled on Node.js (V8).\n\nWhen `@angular/router` parses incoming request URLs, it extracts path segments, matrix parameters, and child outlets into plain JavaScript objects (`Record\u003cstring, string\u003e`). When matrix parameter names or outlet names are numeric strings (such as `/a;990;2522`), the V8 JavaScript engine interprets them as array-indexed properties rather than named properties.\n\nUnder V8\u0027s internal property-storage heuristics, setting numeric keys on an initially empty object causes V8 to allocate a dense array backing store (`HOLEY_ELEMENTS`) sized to the maximum index rather than falling back to sparse dictionary storage. Specifically, assigning sequential or moderately large numeric keys (like `990` followed by `2522`) causes V8 to allocate a contiguous backing store of ~2,522 pointers (~20 KB to 25 KB of heap) for a single 11-byte segment.\n\nBecause each segment in a URL path allocates its own independent `parameters` object, an attacker can craft URLs with repeated numeric matrix parameters to achieve an asymmetric memory amplification factor of approximately **~350x**.\n\n### Impact\n\nSuccessful exploitation allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to exhaust the Node.js old-space heap with modest request volume, terminating the SSR worker with an unrecoverable `JavaScript heap out of memory` fatal error and causing a Denial of Service.\n\n* **High Amplification:** A single 11-byte segment (`/a;990;2522`) consumes ~20 KB\u201325 KB of V8 heap.\n* **Low Concurrency Required:**\n * With 8 KB request paths (~740 segments, within default Nginx 8 KB buffer limits), as few as **12\u201322 concurrent requests** crash a 256 MiB\u2013512 MiB Node.js SSR worker.\n * With smaller 1 KB\u20132 KB request paths (~90\u2013180 segments), a burst of ~50\u2013100 concurrent requests achieves the same heap exhaustion.\n* **Client-side SPAs Unaffected:** Pure client-side Angular applications (Single Page Applications without SSR) are **not** vulnerable, as local browser memory consumption does not cross a security boundary.\n\n### Attack Preconditions \u0026 Vulnerable Configurations\n\nAn application is affected only if **all** of the following conditions are met:\n\n* **SSR Enabled:** The application runs in a Server-Side Rendering environment powered by Node.js / V8.\n* **Direct Router Parsing:** User-controlled request URLs are parsed by `@angular/router` during SSR.\n* **No Reverse-Proxy Semicolon/Segment Filtering:** Upstream reverse proxies (Nginx, Cloudflare, ALB) forward URLs containing semicolons (`;`) and multiple path segments without stripping or rejecting them.\n\n#### Exploit Payload Example\n\nAn attacker sends concurrent HTTP requests with repeated numeric matrix parameters:\n\n```http\nGET /a;990;2522/a;990;2522/a;990;2522/... HTTP/1.1\nHost: example.com\n```\n\nEven with paths under 2 KB, overlapping requests during SSR will rapidly consume the V8 heap until the process crashes.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe issue is resolved by updating `@angular/router` to enforce V8 dictionary elements storage (`setUrlDerivedKey`) for numeric URL-derived keys (index \u003e= 32). This prevents V8 from allocating oversized contiguous array backing stores while preserving route matching, parameter values, and component input bindings.\n\n* `22.2.0`\n* `21.2.24`\n* `20.3.32`\n\n### Workarounds \u0026 Mitigations\n\nIf you cannot immediately upgrade to a patched version, apply one of the following mitigations at your edge or reverse proxy:\n\n1. **Block or Sanitize Matrix Parameters at the Reverse Proxy:** \n Configure your reverse proxy (e.g., Nginx, Cloudflare, or AWS WAF) to reject or strip semicolons (`;`) in request paths before forwarding requests to the Angular SSR service:\n ```nginx\n # Nginx example: reject requests containing matrix parameters\n if ($uri ~* \";\") {\n return 400;\n }\n ```\n2. **Enforce Strict Path Segment Limits:** \n Reject requests with excessive path depth (e.g., more than 20\u201330 segments).\n3. **Increase Node.js Old Space:** \n Increase `--max-old-space-size` (e.g., to 2048 or 4096 MB) to increase the concurrency threshold required to exhaust memory, though this does not fully eliminate the vulnerability under sustained traffic.",
"id": "GHSA-ff3f-86qr-9cv3",
"modified": "2026-09-30T15:40:47Z",
"published": "2026-09-30T15:40:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/security/advisories/GHSA-ff3f-86qr-9cv3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/70716"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/pull/70717"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/03872a80bcf1c89b2b04cdd3f444b2ee954da583"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/5af61216eab8bf4a6697a1d79bda3d857c06f89d"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/ddfe21072ba32ca4cd9d7d3c6b7df66af81d58c4"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/angular/angular"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Angular Server-Side Rendering (SSR): Denial of Service via Numeric URL Matrix Parameters"
}
GHSA-FF4V-MG5Q-R7G9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-08 15:33 – Updated: 2026-10-08 15:33Uncontrolled eviction in the pending sign-in tables of the REST API in Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to make other users' OpenID Connect, SAML and passkey sign-ins fail. The routes that start a single sign-on and hand out a passkey sign-in challenge are reached without authentication and stored pending state in bounded tables that dropped their oldest entry when full, whoever had started it. An attacker who starts sign-ins a few times a second (about a hundred a second for passkeys) pushes every other user's pending sign-in out of the table before that user's browser returns, denying single sign-on and passkey sign-in for as long as the requests continue.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-107585"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-08T15:17:44Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Uncontrolled eviction in the pending sign-in tables of the REST API in Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to make other users\u0027 OpenID Connect, SAML and passkey sign-ins fail. The routes that start a single sign-on and hand out a passkey sign-in challenge are reached without authentication and stored pending state in bounded tables that dropped their oldest entry when full, whoever had started it. An attacker who starts sign-ins a few times a second (about a hundred a second for passkeys) pushes every other user\u0027s pending sign-in out of the table before that user\u0027s browser returns, denying single sign-on and passkey sign-in for as long as the requests continue.",
"id": "GHSA-ff4v-mg5q-r7g9",
"modified": "2026-10-08T15:33:04Z",
"published": "2026-10-08T15:33:04Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-107585"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/releases/v6.3.6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/work_items/63"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-FFFR-7X4X-F98Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-16 17:16 – Updated: 2022-09-16 17:16Meta
- CVSS:
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H/E:F/RL:O/RC:C(5.5)
Problem
Requesting invalid or non-existing resources via HTTP triggers the page error handler which again could retrieve content to be shown as an error message from another page. This leads to a scenario in which the application is calling itself recursively - amplifying the impact of the initial attack until the limits of the web server are exceeded.
This vulnerability is the same as described in TYPO3-CORE-SA-2021-005 (CVE-2021-21359). A regression, introduced during TYPO3 v11 development, led to this situation.
Solution
Update to TYPO3 version 11.5.16 that fixes the problem described above.
Credits
Thanks to Rik Willems who reported this issue and to TYPO3 core & security team member Oliver Hader who fixed the issue.
References
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms-core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "11.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.5.16"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "11.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.5.16"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-36104"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-09-16T17:16:46Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-09-13T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "\u003e ### Meta\n\u003e * CVSS: `CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H/E:F/RL:O/RC:C` (5.5)\n\n### Problem\nRequesting invalid or non-existing resources via HTTP triggers the page error handler which again could retrieve content to be shown as an error message from another page. This leads to a scenario in which the application is calling itself recursively - amplifying the impact of the initial attack until the limits of the web server are exceeded.\n\nThis vulnerability is the same as described in [TYPO3-CORE-SA-2021-005](https://typo3.org/security/advisory/typo3-core-sa-2021-005) ([CVE-2021-21359](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-21359)). A regression, introduced during TYPO3 v11 development, led to this situation.\n\n### Solution\nUpdate to TYPO3 version 11.5.16 that fixes the problem described above.\n\n### Credits\nThanks to Rik Willems who reported this issue and to TYPO3 core \u0026 security team member Oliver Hader who fixed the issue.\n\n### References\n* [TYPO3-CORE-SA-2022-006](https://typo3.org/security/advisory/typo3-core-sa-2022-006)",
"id": "GHSA-fffr-7x4x-f98q",
"modified": "2022-09-16T17:16:46Z",
"published": "2022-09-16T17:16:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3/typo3/security/advisories/GHSA-fffr-7x4x-f98q"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-36104"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3/typo3/commit/179dd7cd78947081d573fee2050e197faa556f13"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3/typo3/commit/fc51ccbf2bb8a8c959aa74cbceca124971e6e7fd"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/typo3/cms-core/CVE-2022-36104.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/typo3/cms/CVE-2022-36104.yaml"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3/typo3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://typo3.org/security/advisory/typo3-core-sa-2022-006"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "TYPO3 CMS vulnerable to Denial of Service in Page Error Handling"
}
GHSA-FFHP-M2C7-JV8H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-27 21:31 – Updated: 2026-08-31 21:31Spring for GraphQL's Spring Data pagination support resolves arguments of a scrollable query and forwards the client-supplied values to the underlying repository. An attacker can forge a malicious query for a Connection field that can exhaust application memory or place significant, prolonged load on the underlying datastore, resulting in a Denial of Service. Spring for GraphQL 2.0.0 - 2.0.4 Spring for GraphQL 1.4.0 - 1.4.6 Spring for GraphQL 1.2.0 - 1.3.9
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-59289"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-27T20:17:55Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Spring for GraphQL\u0027s Spring Data pagination support resolves arguments of a scrollable query and forwards the client-supplied values to the underlying repository. An attacker can forge a malicious query for a Connection field that can exhaust application memory or place significant, prolonged load on the underlying datastore, resulting in a Denial of Service.\nSpring for GraphQL 2.0.0 - 2.0.4\nSpring for GraphQL 1.4.0 - 1.4.6\nSpring for GraphQL 1.2.0 - 1.3.9",
"id": "GHSA-ffhp-m2c7-jv8h",
"modified": "2026-08-31T21:31:54Z",
"published": "2026-08-27T21:31:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-59289"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://spring.io/security/cve-2026-59289"
}
],
"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-FFMR-8P66-95PX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:47 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:37GNU Binutils 2.28 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a crafted ELF file with many program headers, related to the get_program_headers function in readelf.c.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-9039"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-05-18T01:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "GNU Binutils 2.28 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a crafted ELF file with many program headers, related to the get_program_headers function in readelf.c.",
"id": "GHSA-ffmr-8p66-95px",
"modified": "2025-04-20T03:37:47Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:47:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-9039"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2017/05/12/binutils-multiple-crashes"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/201709-02"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git%3Bh=82156ab704b08b124d319c0decdbd48b3ca2dac5"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=82156ab704b08b124d319c0decdbd48b3ca2dac5"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98580"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FFP2-8P2H-4M5J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-20 18:24 – Updated: 2024-11-26 18:59Impact
Password Pusher comes with a configurable rate limiter. In versions prior to v1.49.0, the rate limiter could be bypassed by forging proxy headers allowing bad actors to send unlimited traffic to the site potentially causing a denial of service.
Additionally, with the ability to bypass rate limiting, it also allows attackers to more easily execute brute force attacks.
Patches
In v1.49.0, a fix was implemented to only authorize proxies on local IPs which resolves this issue.
If you are running a remote proxy, please see this documentation on how to authorize the IP address of your remote proxy.
Workarounds
It is highly suggested to upgrade to at least v1.49.0 to mitigate this risk.
If for some reason you cannot immediately upgrade, the alternative is that you can add rules to your proxy and/or firewall to not accept external proxy headers such as X-Forwarded-* from clients.
References
The new settings are configurable to authorize remote proxies.
Credits
Thank you to Positive Technologies for reporting and working with me to bring this CVE to the community with the associated fix.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "pwpush"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.49.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-52796"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-11-20T18:24:28Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-20T17:15:20Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nPassword Pusher comes with a configurable rate limiter. In versions prior to [v1.49.0](https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher/releases/tag/v1.49.0), the rate limiter could be bypassed by forging proxy headers allowing bad actors to send unlimited traffic to the site potentially causing a denial of service.\n\nAdditionally, with the ability to bypass rate limiting, it also allows attackers to more easily execute brute force attacks.\n\n### Patches\n\nIn [v1.49.0](https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher/releases/tag/v1.49.0), a fix was implemented to only authorize proxies on local IPs which resolves this issue.\n\nIf you are running a remote proxy, please see [this documentation](https://docs.pwpush.com/docs/proxies/#trusted-proxies) on how to authorize the IP address of your remote proxy.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nIt is highly suggested to upgrade to at least [v1.49.0](https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher/releases/tag/v1.49.0) to mitigate this risk.\n\nIf for some reason you cannot immediately upgrade, the alternative is that you can add rules to your proxy and/or firewall to not accept external proxy headers such as `X-Forwarded-*` from clients.\n\n### References\n\nThe new settings are [configurable to authorize remote proxies](https://docs.pwpush.com/docs/proxies/#trusted-proxies).\n\n### Credits\n\nThank you to [Positive Technologies](https://www.ptsecurity.com/ww-en/) for reporting and working with me to bring this CVE to the community with the associated fix.\n",
"id": "GHSA-ffp2-8p2h-4m5j",
"modified": "2024-11-26T18:59:48Z",
"published": "2024-11-20T18:24:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher/security/advisories/GHSA-ffp2-8p2h-4m5j"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-52796"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.pwpush.com/docs/proxies/#trusted-proxies"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pglombardo/PasswordPusher/releases/tag/v1.49.0"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/pwpush/CVE-2024-52796.yml"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Password Pusher rate limiter can be bypassed by forging proxy headers"
}
GHSA-FG23-6J5X-J67J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-19 06:30 – Updated: 2024-06-19 06:30An uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability exists in the upload-link endpoint of mintplex-labs/anything-llm. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a denial of service (DOS) by shutting down the server through sending invalid upload requests. Specifically, the server can be made to shut down by sending an empty body with a 'Content-Length: 0' header or by sending a body with arbitrary content, such as 'asdasdasd', with a 'Content-Length: 9' header. The vulnerability is reproducible by users with at least a 'Manager' role, sending a crafted request to any workspace. This issue indicates that a previous fix was not effective in mitigating the vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-5208"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-06-19T06:15:11Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability exists in the `upload-link` endpoint of mintplex-labs/anything-llm. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a denial of service (DOS) by shutting down the server through sending invalid upload requests. Specifically, the server can be made to shut down by sending an empty body with a \u0027Content-Length: 0\u0027 header or by sending a body with arbitrary content, such as \u0027asdasdasd\u0027, with a \u0027Content-Length: 9\u0027 header. The vulnerability is reproducible by users with at least a \u0027Manager\u0027 role, sending a crafted request to any workspace. This issue indicates that a previous fix was not effective in mitigating the vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-fg23-6j5x-j67j",
"modified": "2024-06-19T06:30:35Z",
"published": "2024-06-19T06:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-5208"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mintplex-labs/anything-llm/commit/e2439c6d4c3cfdacd96cd1b7b92d1f89c3cc8459"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/6c8bdfa1-ec56-4b02-bde9-cfc27470e6ca"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FG3J-Q579-V8X4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-06-15 15:54 – Updated: 2022-02-08 21:22In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an OutOfMemory-Exception while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.pdfbox:pdfbox"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.0.24"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.pdfbox:pdfbox-parent"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.0.24"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-31811"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770",
"CWE-789"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2021-06-14T19:39:19Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2021-06-12T10:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an OutOfMemory-Exception while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.",
"id": "GHSA-fg3j-q579-v8x4",
"modified": "2022-02-08T21:22:40Z",
"published": "2021-06-15T15:54:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-31811"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2021.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2022.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujan2022.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuapr2022.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com//security-alerts/cpujul2021.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MDJKJQOMVFDFIDS27OQJXNOYHV2O273D"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/7HHWJRFXZ3PTKLJCOM7WJEYZFKFWMNSV"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rfe26bcaba564deb505c32711ba68df7ec589797dcd96ff3389a8aaba@%3Cnotifications.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rf937c2236e6c79cdb99f76a70690dd345e53dbe0707cb506a202e43e@%3Cannounce.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/re3bd16f0cc8f1fbda46b06a4b8241cd417f71402809baa81548fc20e@%3Cusers.pdfbox.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/re3bd16f0cc8f1fbda46b06a4b8241cd417f71402809baa81548fc20e%40%3Cusers.pdfbox.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/re0cacd3fb337cdf8469853913ed2b4ddd8f8bfc52ff0ddbe61c1dfba@%3Ccommits.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd4b6db6c3b8ab3c70f1c3bbd725a40920896453ffc2744ade6afd9fb@%3Cnotifications.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r2090789e4dcc2c87aacbd87d5f18e2d64dcb9f6eb7c47f5cf7d293cb@%3Cnotifications.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r179cc3b6822c167702ab35fe36093d5da4c99af44238c8a754c6860f@%3Ccommits.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r143fd8445e0e778f4a85187bd79438630b96b8040e9401751fdb8aea@%3Ccommits.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r132e9dbbe0ebdc08b39583d8be0a575fdba573d60a42d940228bceff@%3Cnotifications.ofbiz.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/06/12/2"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Uncontrolled memory consumption"
}
GHSA-FG4Q-58FC-39W8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-27 03:32 – Updated: 2026-08-27 03:32The vulnerability occurs when a client sends HTTP/1.1 pipelined requests over a single connection, causing the Reactor Netty HTTP server to consume an excessive amount of memory. Reactor Netty 1.3.0 - 1.3.6 Reactor Netty 1.1.0 - 1.2.18 Reactor Netty 1.0.52 and earlier
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-47874"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-27T01:17:33Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The vulnerability occurs when a client sends HTTP/1.1 pipelined requests over a single connection, causing the Reactor Netty HTTP server to consume an excessive amount of memory.\nReactor Netty 1.3.0 - 1.3.6\nReactor Netty 1.1.0 - 1.2.18\nReactor Netty 1.0.52 and earlier",
"id": "GHSA-fg4q-58fc-39w8",
"modified": "2026-08-27T03:32:58Z",
"published": "2026-08-27T03:32:58Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-47874"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://spring.io/security/cve-2026-47874"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-FG4Q-8P94-MJ4J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-08 09:30 – Updated: 2025-11-03 21:33In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sound/virtio: Fix cancel_sync warnings on uninitialized work_structs
Betty reported hitting the following warning:
[ 8.709131][ T221] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 221 at kernel/workqueue.c:4182 ... [ 8.713282][ T221] Call trace: [ 8.713365][ T221] __flush_work+0x8d0/0x914 [ 8.713468][ T221] __cancel_work_sync+0xac/0xfc [ 8.713570][ T221] cancel_work_sync+0x24/0x34 [ 8.713667][ T221] virtsnd_remove+0xa8/0xf8 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276] [ 8.713868][ T221] virtsnd_probe+0x48c/0x664 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276] [ 8.714035][ T221] virtio_dev_probe+0x28c/0x390 [ 8.714139][ T221] really_probe+0x1bc/0x4c8 ...
It seems we're hitting the error path in virtsnd_probe(), which triggers a virtsnd_remove() which iterates over the substreams calling cancel_work_sync() on the elapsed_period work_struct.
Looking at the code, from earlier in: virtsnd_probe()->virtsnd_build_devs()->virtsnd_pcm_parse_cfg()
We set snd->nsubstreams, allocate the snd->substreams, and if we then hit an error on the info allocation or something in virtsnd_ctl_query_info() fails, we will exit without having initialized the elapsed_period work_struct.
When that error path unwinds we then call virtsnd_remove() which as long as the substreams array is allocated, will iterate through calling cancel_work_sync() on the uninitialized work struct hitting this warning.
Takashi Iwai suggested this fix, which initializes the substreams structure right after allocation, so that if we hit the error paths we avoid trying to cleanup uninitialized data.
Note: I have not yet managed to reproduce the issue myself, so this patch has had limited testing.
Feedback or thoughts would be appreciated!
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-37805"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-08T07:15:51Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nsound/virtio: Fix cancel_sync warnings on uninitialized work_structs\n\nBetty reported hitting the following warning:\n\n[ 8.709131][ T221] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 221 at kernel/workqueue.c:4182\n...\n[ 8.713282][ T221] Call trace:\n[ 8.713365][ T221] __flush_work+0x8d0/0x914\n[ 8.713468][ T221] __cancel_work_sync+0xac/0xfc\n[ 8.713570][ T221] cancel_work_sync+0x24/0x34\n[ 8.713667][ T221] virtsnd_remove+0xa8/0xf8 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276]\n[ 8.713868][ T221] virtsnd_probe+0x48c/0x664 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276]\n[ 8.714035][ T221] virtio_dev_probe+0x28c/0x390\n[ 8.714139][ T221] really_probe+0x1bc/0x4c8\n...\n\nIt seems we\u0027re hitting the error path in virtsnd_probe(), which\ntriggers a virtsnd_remove() which iterates over the substreams\ncalling cancel_work_sync() on the elapsed_period work_struct.\n\nLooking at the code, from earlier in:\nvirtsnd_probe()-\u003evirtsnd_build_devs()-\u003evirtsnd_pcm_parse_cfg()\n\nWe set snd-\u003ensubstreams, allocate the snd-\u003esubstreams, and if\nwe then hit an error on the info allocation or something in\nvirtsnd_ctl_query_info() fails, we will exit without having\ninitialized the elapsed_period work_struct.\n\nWhen that error path unwinds we then call virtsnd_remove()\nwhich as long as the substreams array is allocated, will iterate\nthrough calling cancel_work_sync() on the uninitialized work\nstruct hitting this warning.\n\nTakashi Iwai suggested this fix, which initializes the substreams\nstructure right after allocation, so that if we hit the error\npaths we avoid trying to cleanup uninitialized data.\n\nNote: I have not yet managed to reproduce the issue myself, so\nthis patch has had limited testing.\n\nFeedback or thoughts would be appreciated!",
"id": "GHSA-fg4q-8p94-mj4j",
"modified": "2025-11-03T21:33:47Z",
"published": "2025-05-08T09:30:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-37805"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3c7df2e27346eb40a0e86230db1ccab195c97cfe"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/54c7b864fbe4423a07b443a4ada0106052942116"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5be9407b41eae20eef9140f5cfbfcbc3d01aaf45"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/66046b586c0aaa9332483bcdbd76e3305d6138e9"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9908498ce929a5a052b79bb7942f9ea317312ce4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e03b10c45c7675b6098190c6e7de1b656d8bcdbe"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/05/msg00045.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
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:
- 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.
- 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.
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.