HTTP request smuggling via conflicting length headers
Published Jan 29, 2020 · Updated Aug 5, 2024
HTTP request smuggling in Netty before 4.1.44 allows remote attackers to conceal requests behind conflicting message-length headers. HttpObjectDecoder accepts duplicate Content-Length fields or a Content-Length field combined with Transfer-Encoding instead of rejecting the ambiguous HTTP/1.1 message. Exploitation requires Netty and an HTTP intermediary to disagree on request boundaries, enabling front-end control bypass or cross-user request interference.
Summary
What happened
HTTP request smuggling in Netty before 4.1.44 allows remote attackers to conceal requests behind conflicting message-length headers. HttpObjectDecoder accepts duplicate Content-Length fields or a Content-Length field combined with Transfer-Encoding instead of rejecting the ambiguous HTTP/1.1 message. Exploitation requires Netty and an HTTP intermediary to disagree on request boundaries, enabling front-end control bypass or cross-user request interference.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2019-20445
- Published
- Jan 29, 2020
- Updated
- Aug 5, 2024
- Vendor
- Unknown vendor
- Product
- Unknown product
- Classifications
- CWE-444, CAPEC-33, T1190
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Jan 29, 2020CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Aug 5, 2024Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Affected products and versions are unavailable in this record.
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- Upstream conflicting-header reproductionproof of concept · unverified
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo