Back to the CVE list
CVE-2025-43859

h11 accepts some malformed Chunked-Encoding bodies

CVSS score

9.1

EPSS probability

%0.6

Risk score

0.1

Published

1 y ago

Patch status has not yet been verified

Resmî kaynaklarda yeterli kanıt bulunamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.

Impact on My Inventory

Only the personal products you have added to your account are assessed; an organisation's inventory does not appear here.

Checking session…

Vulnerability description

DayBreach CVE AI Research

CVE-2025-43859 has vendor, distribution, patch and security-source records on file. We can compare them and prepare an explanation linked to the evidence.

### Impact A leniency in h11's parsing of line terminators in chunked-coding message bodies can lead to request smuggling vulnerabilities under certain conditions. ### Details HTTP/1.1 Chunked-Encoding bodies are formatted as a sequence of "chunks", each of which consists of: - chunk length - `\r\n` - `length` bytes of content - `\r\n` In versions of h11 up to 0.14.0, h11 instead parsed them as: - chunk length - `\r\n` - `length` bytes of content - any two bytes i.e. it did not validate that the trailing `\r\n` bytes were correct, and if you put 2 bytes of garbage there it would be accepted, instead of correctly rejecting the body as malformed. By itself this is harmless. However, suppose you have a proxy or reverse-proxy that tries to analyze HTTP requests, and your proxy has a _different_ bug in parsing Chunked-Encoding, acting as if the format is: - chunk length - `\r\n` - `length` bytes of content - more bytes of content, as many as it takes until you find a `\r\n` For example, [pound](https://github.com/graygnuorg/pound/pull/43) had this bug -- it can happen if an implementer uses a generic "read until end of line" helper to consumes the trailing `\r\n`. In this case, h11 and your proxy may both accept the same stream of bytes, but interpret them differently. For example, consider the following HTTP request(s) (assume all line breaks are `\r\n`): ``` GET /one HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost Transfer-Encoding: chunked 5 AAAAAXX2 45 0 GET /two HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost Transfer-Encoding: chunked 0 ``` Here h11 will interpret it as two requests, one with body `AAAAA45` and one with an empty body, while our hypothetical buggy proxy will interpret it as a single request, with body `AAAAXX20\r\n\r\nGET /two ...`. And any time two HTTP processors both accept the same string of bytes but interpret them differently, you have the conditions for a "request smuggling" attack. For example, if `/two` is a dangerous endpoint and the job of the reverse proxy is to stop requests from getting there, then an attacker could use a bytestream like the above to circumvent this protection. Even worse, if our buggy reverse proxy receives two requests from different users: ``` GET /one HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost Transfer-Encoding: chunked 5 AAAAAXX999 0 ``` ``` GET /two HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost Cookie: SESSION_KEY=abcdef... ``` ...it will consider the first request to be complete and valid, and send both on to the h11-based web server over the same socket. The server will then see the two concatenated requests, and interpret them as _one_ request to `/one` whose body includes `/two`'s session key, potentially allowing one user to steal another's credentials. ### Patches Fixed in h11 0.15.0. ### Workarounds Since exploitation requires the combination of buggy h11 with a buggy (reverse) proxy, fixing either component is sufficient to mitigate this issue. ### Credits Reported by Jeppe Bonde Weikop on 2025-01-09.

IMPACT: Affected Products and Software

Affected Products

The following products are affected by CVE-2025-43859 vulnerability. Where our threat engine knows the exact affected versions, they are listed below.

IDVENDORPRODUCTACTION
1pypih11 View
Total affected vendors: 1|Products: 1

RED HAT CSAF/VEX: Product Impact Check

Red Hat has not yet published a CSAF/VEX impact record for this CVE. This does not mean “not affected”.

SCORING: CVSS from Multiple Sources

CVSS Scores

The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardised framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and display CVSS scores from several sources for each CVE.

SCOREVERSIONSEVERITYVECTORSOURCE
9.1CVSS 3.x—Vector not publishedGitHub Advisory
0.0CVSS 4.0—Vector not publishedGitHub Advisory

Patch and Remediation Guide

Solution & Remediation Advisory

Patch status unknown

İncelenen resmî kaynaklarda yama durumu doğrulanamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.

Confirm the affected product and version against the source evidence above.
Restrict access to internet-facing services and apply network segmentation.
Until a patch is confirmed, follow the vendor advisory; do not read an unknown status as “no patch”.
Monitor server logs and network endpoints for signs of anomalous execution.

Public exploit and active exploitation status

Verified exploit intelligence

No verified public PoC, exploit repository or Metasploit module has been found for this CVE yet.

Weakness Classification and Attack Patterns (CWE & CAPEC)

CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration

While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorises the common flaws or weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2025-43859 is associated with the following CWEs:

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2025-43859 weaknesses.

Attack Vector and Accessibility

ExposureAğ üzerinden
PermissionsGerekmiyor
UserGerekmiyor

Official Sources and Advisories

CVSS Vector Radar Chart

9.1 / 10
Attack VectorNetworkComplexityLowPrivilegesNoneUser Interact.NoneConfidentialityLowIntegrityNoneAvailabilityNone

Vulnerability Scoring Details

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Attack VectorNetwork
Attack ComplexityLow
Privileges RequiredNone required
User InteractionNone required
Confidentiality (Gizlilik)Low
Integrity (Bütünlük)None
Availability (Erişilebilirlik)None

Yama durumu bilinmiyor

İncelenen resmî kaynaklarda yama durumu doğrulanamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.

Follow the vendor

P
pypi logo
pypi

Weakness Type (CWE & CAPEC)

Similar Vulnerabilities

Get this vulnerability through the API

Affected products, version ranges, exploitation status and patch information in a single request, with a free key.

curl -H "x-api-key: $DAYBREACH_API_KEY" \
  "https://api.daybreach.dev/api/v1/intel/cves/CVE-2025-43859"
CVE-2025-43859 · h11 accepts some malformed Chunked-Encoding…