Service interruption via oversized AJP POST request
Published Aug 5, 2022 · Updated Aug 3, 2024
Denial of service in Red Hat Undertow allows remote attackers to interrupt service with an oversized AJP POST request. AjpServerRequestConduit closes the backend connection without responding when the request exceeds maxEntitySize, causing the proxy to mark the worker as failed. Exposure requires an AJP listener behind a front-end proxy; mod_cluster can return 503 responses for up to 10 seconds, while mod_proxy_balancer normally forces recovery.
Summary
What happened
Denial of service in Red Hat Undertow allows remote attackers to interrupt service with an oversized AJP POST request. AjpServerRequestConduit closes the backend connection without responding when the request exceeds maxEntitySize, causing the proxy to mark the worker as failed. Exposure requires an AJP listener behind a front-end proxy; mod_cluster can return 503 responses for up to 10 seconds, while mod_proxy_balancer normally forces recovery.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2022-2053
- Published
- Aug 5, 2022
- Updated
- Aug 3, 2024
- Vendor
- Red Hat
- Product
- Undertow
- Classifications
- CWE-400, T1499.004
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Aug 5, 2022CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Aug 3, 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=Fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2
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