h11 accepts some malformed Chunked-Encoding bodies
CVSS Skor
9.1
EPSS İhtimal
%0.6
Risk Skoru
0.1
Yayın
1 yıl önce
Resmî kaynaklarda yeterli kanıt bulunamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.
Envanterimdeki Etkisi
Yalnızca hesabınıza eklediğiniz kişisel ürünler değerlendirilir; kurumsal envanter burada görünmez.
Oturum kontrol ediliyor…
Zafiyet Açıklaması
DayBreach CVE AI Araştırması
CVE-2025-43859 için toplanan üretici, dağıtım, yama ve güvenlik kaynağı kayıtlarını karşılaştırıp kanıt bağlantılı bir açıklama hazırlayalım.
### 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 — Etkilenen Ürünler ve Yazılımlar
Affected Products
The following products are affected by CVE-2025-43859 vulnerability. Even if our threat engine is aware of the exact versions of the products that are affected, the information is represented below.
| ID | VENDOR | PRODUCT | ACTION |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | pypi | h11 | İncele |
RED HAT CSAF/VEX — Ürün Etki Kontrolü
SCORING — CVSS Çoklu Kaynak Skoru
CVSS Scores
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardized framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and display CVSS scores from various sources for each CVE.
| SCORE | VERSION | SEVERITY | VECTOR | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.1 | CVSS 3.x | — | Vektör yayımlanmadı | GitHub Advisory |
| 0.0 | CVSS 4.0 | — | Vektör yayımlanmadı | GitHub Advisory |
Yama ve İyileştirme Rehberi (Solution)
Solution & Remediation Advisory
İncelenen resmî kaynaklarda yama durumu doğrulanamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.
Public exploit ve aktif sömürü durumu
Doğrulanmış exploit istihbaratı
Bu CVE için henüz doğrulanmış public PoC, exploit repository’si veya Metasploit modülü bulunamadı.
Zafiyet Dağılımı ve Saldırı Kalıpları (CWE & CAPEC)
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes 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.
Saldırı Vektörü ve Erişilebilirlik Karakteristiği
Resmi Kaynaklar ve Danışma Bültenleri
İlgili Benzer Açıklar
Bu açığı API ile alın
Etkilenen ürünler, sürüm aralıkları, istismar durumu ve yama bilgisi tek istekte; ücretsiz anahtarla.
curl -H "x-api-key: $DAYBREACH_API_KEY" \ "https://api.daybreach.dev/api/v1/intel/cves/CVE-2025-43859"