Request smuggling via NUL-truncated header names
Published Nov 11, 2024 · Updated Nov 3, 2025
HTTP request smuggling in GNOME libsoup before 3.6.0 allows remote attackers to alter proxied request boundaries via crafted headers. The HTTP/1 header parser deletes NUL bytes from its copied header block before splitting names and values, causing a Transfer-Encoding name ending in NUL to be accepted as Transfer-Encoding. Exploitation requires a libsoup-based server in a proxy chain whose peer parses the same bytes differently, enabling request-boundary desynchronization and unauthorized request routing.
Summary
What happened
HTTP request smuggling in GNOME libsoup before 3.6.0 allows remote attackers to alter proxied request boundaries via crafted headers. The HTTP/1 header parser deletes NUL bytes from its copied header block before splitting names and values, causing a Transfer-Encoding name ending in NUL to be accepted as Transfer-Encoding. Exploitation requires a libsoup-based server in a proxy chain whose peer parses the same bytes differently, enabling request-boundary desynchronization and unauthorized request routing.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2024-52530
- Published
- Nov 11, 2024
- Updated
- Nov 3, 2025
- Vendor
- GNOME
- Product
- libsoup
- Classifications
- CWE-444, T1190
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Nov 11, 2024CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Nov 3, 2025Record 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=0 <3.6.0
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