Response splitting via unsanitized early-hints headers
Published Mar 2, 2020 · Updated Aug 4, 2024
HTTP response splitting in Puma before 3.12.4 and 4.0.0 through 4.3.2 allows attackers to inject headers or a response body. Puma's early-hints response path writes application-supplied header values without rejecting carriage returns, so clients treat injected text as a new header or body. Exploitation requires an application to place attacker-controlled input in an early-hints header and can enable downstream attacks such as cross-site scripting.
Summary
What happened
HTTP response splitting in Puma before 3.12.4 and 4.0.0 through 4.3.2 allows attackers to inject headers or a response body. Puma's early-hints response path writes application-supplied header values without rejecting carriage returns, so clients treat injected text as a new header or body. Exploitation requires an application to place attacker-controlled input in an early-hints header and can enable downstream attacks such as cross-site scripting.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2020-5249
- Published
- Mar 2, 2020
- Updated
- Aug 4, 2024
- Vendor
- Puma
- Product
- Puma
- Classifications
- CWE-74, CWE-113
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- authenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Mar 2, 2020CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Aug 4, 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?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=< 3.12.4
- Affected versionversion=>= 4.0.0, < 4.3.3
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
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
No public exploit references are available in this record.
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