CWE-770
AllowedAllocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Abstraction: Base · Status: Incomplete
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
3030 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-QQ35-93PF-CXXV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-10 21:30 – Updated: 2025-03-21 12:30In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
scsi: core: Fix scsi_mode_sense() buffer length handling
Several problems exist with scsi_mode_sense() buffer length handling:
1) The allocation length field of the MODE SENSE(10) command is 16-bits, occupying bytes 7 and 8 of the CDB. With this command, access to mode pages larger than 255 bytes is thus possible. However, the CDB allocation length field is set by assigning len to byte 8 only, thus truncating buffer length larger than 255.
2) If scsi_mode_sense() is called with len smaller than 8 with sdev->use_10_for_ms set, or smaller than 4 otherwise, the buffer length is increased to 8 and 4 respectively, and the buffer is zero filled with these increased values, thus corrupting the memory following the buffer.
Fix these 2 problems by using put_unaligned_be16() to set the allocation length field of MODE SENSE(10) CDB and by returning an error when len is too small.
Furthermore, if len is larger than 255B, always try MODE SENSE(10) first, even if the device driver did not set sdev->use_10_for_ms. In case of invalid opcode error for MODE SENSE(10), access to mode pages larger than 255 bytes are not retried using MODE SENSE(6). To avoid buffer length overflows for the MODE_SENSE(10) case, check that len is smaller than 65535 bytes.
While at it, also fix the folowing:
-
Use get_unaligned_be16() to retrieve the mode data length and block descriptor length fields of the mode sense reply header instead of using an open coded calculation.
-
Fix the kdoc dbd argument explanation: the DBD bit stands for Disable Block Descriptor, which is the opposite of what the dbd argument description was.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-47182"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-10T19:15:47Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nscsi: core: Fix scsi_mode_sense() buffer length handling\n\nSeveral problems exist with scsi_mode_sense() buffer length handling:\n\n 1) The allocation length field of the MODE SENSE(10) command is 16-bits,\n occupying bytes 7 and 8 of the CDB. With this command, access to mode\n pages larger than 255 bytes is thus possible. However, the CDB\n allocation length field is set by assigning len to byte 8 only, thus\n truncating buffer length larger than 255.\n\n 2) If scsi_mode_sense() is called with len smaller than 8 with\n sdev-\u003euse_10_for_ms set, or smaller than 4 otherwise, the buffer length\n is increased to 8 and 4 respectively, and the buffer is zero filled\n with these increased values, thus corrupting the memory following the\n buffer.\n\nFix these 2 problems by using put_unaligned_be16() to set the allocation\nlength field of MODE SENSE(10) CDB and by returning an error when len is\ntoo small.\n\nFurthermore, if len is larger than 255B, always try MODE SENSE(10) first,\neven if the device driver did not set sdev-\u003euse_10_for_ms. In case of\ninvalid opcode error for MODE SENSE(10), access to mode pages larger than\n255 bytes are not retried using MODE SENSE(6). To avoid buffer length\noverflows for the MODE_SENSE(10) case, check that len is smaller than 65535\nbytes.\n\nWhile at it, also fix the folowing:\n\n * Use get_unaligned_be16() to retrieve the mode data length and block\n descriptor length fields of the mode sense reply header instead of using\n an open coded calculation.\n\n * Fix the kdoc dbd argument explanation: the DBD bit stands for Disable\n Block Descriptor, which is the opposite of what the dbd argument\n description was.",
"id": "GHSA-qq35-93pf-cxxv",
"modified": "2025-03-21T12:30:31Z",
"published": "2024-04-10T21:30:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-47182"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/17b49bcbf8351d3dbe57204468ac34f033ed60bc"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e15de347faf4a9f494cbd4e9a623d343dc1b5851"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-QQ9R-36HC-F769
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-04 12:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 08:16A flaw was found in Open Virtual Network where the service monitor MAC does not properly rate limit. This issue could allow an attacker to cause a denial of service, including on deployments with CoPP enabled and properly configured.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-3153"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-10-04T12:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in Open Virtual Network where the service monitor MAC does not properly rate limit. This issue could allow an attacker to cause a denial of service, including on deployments with CoPP enabled and properly configured.",
"id": "GHSA-qq9r-36hc-f769",
"modified": "2024-04-04T08:16:22Z",
"published": "2023-10-04T12:30:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-3153"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn/issues/198"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn/commit/9a3f7ed905e525ebdcb14541e775211cbb0203bd"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-3153"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2213279"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-announce/2023-August/000327.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2023-August/407553.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-QQC8-RV37-79Q5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-15 09:30 – Updated: 2024-12-18 19:21Resource Exhaustion in Mattermost Server versions 8.1.x before 8.1.10 fails to limit the size of the payload that can be read and parsed allowing an attacker to send a very large email payload and crash the server.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost/server/v8"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20240209181221-674f549daf0e"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20240209181221-674f549daf0e"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server/v5"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20240209181221-674f549daf0e"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server/v6"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20240209181221-674f549daf0e"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-28053"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-12-13T20:37:40Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-03-15T09:15:07Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "Resource Exhaustion in Mattermost Server versions 8.1.x before 8.1.10 fails to limit\u00a0the size of the payload that can be read and parsed allowing an attacker to send a\u00a0very large email payload and crash the server.\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-qqc8-rv37-79q5",
"modified": "2024-12-18T19:21:46Z",
"published": "2024-03-15T09:30:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-28053"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-qqc8-rv37-79q5"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mattermost.com/security-updates"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Mattermost Server Resource Exhaustion"
}
GHSA-QQJ3-G7MX-5P4W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-21 20:25 – Updated: 2026-07-02 20:30Impact
This vulnerability affects NeuVector deployments only when the Report anonymous cluster data option is enabled. When this option is enabled, NeuVector sends anonymous telemetry data to the telemetry server at https://upgrades.neuvector-upgrade-responder.livestock.rancher.io.
In affected versions, NeuVector does not enforce TLS certificate verification when transmitting anonymous cluster data to the telemetry server. As a result, the communication channel is susceptible to man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks, where an attacker could intercept or modify the transmitted data. Additionally, NeuVector loads the response of the telemetry server is loaded into memory without size limitation, which makes it vulnerable to a Denial of Service(DoS) attack.
The patched version includes the following security improvements:
- NeuVector now verifies the telemetry server’s TLS certificate chain and hostname during the handshake process. This ensures that all telemetry communications occur over a trusted and verified channel.
- NeuVector limits the telemetry server’s response to 256 bytes, mitigating the risk of memory exhaustion and DoS attacks.
These security enhancements are enabled by default and require no user action.
Patches
Patched versions include release v5.4.7 and above.
Workarounds
If you cannot update to a patched version, you can temporarily disable the Report anonymous cluster data, which is enabled by default in NeuVector. To change this setting, go to Settings → Configuration → Report anonymous cluster data in the NeuVector UI.
Disabling this option prevents NeuVector from sending telemetry data to the telemetry server, which helps mitigate this vulnerability.
References
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: - Reach out to the SUSE Rancher Security team for security related inquiries. - Open an issue in the NeuVector repository. - Verify with our support matrix and product support lifecycle.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/neuvector/neuvector"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.0.0-20230727023453-1c4957d53911"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20251020133207-084a437033b4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-54470"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-295",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-10-21T20:25:21Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-30T10:15:35Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\nThis vulnerability affects NeuVector deployments only when the `Report anonymous cluster data option` is enabled. When this option is enabled, NeuVector sends anonymous telemetry data to the telemetry server at `https://upgrades.neuvector-upgrade-responder.livestock.rancher.io`.\n\nIn affected versions, NeuVector does not enforce TLS certificate verification when transmitting anonymous cluster data to the telemetry server. As a result, the communication channel is susceptible to man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks, where an attacker could intercept or modify the transmitted data. Additionally, NeuVector loads the response of the telemetry server is loaded into memory without size limitation, which makes it vulnerable to a Denial of Service(DoS) attack. \n\nThe patched version includes the following security improvements:\n- NeuVector now verifies the telemetry server\u2019s `TLS certificate chain` and `hostname` during the handshake process. This ensures that all telemetry communications occur over a trusted and verified channel.\n- NeuVector limits the telemetry server\u2019s response to `256 bytes`, mitigating the risk of memory exhaustion and DoS attacks.\n\nThese security enhancements are enabled by default and require no user action.\n\n\n### Patches\nPatched versions include release **v5.4.7** and above.\n\n### Workarounds\nIf you cannot update to a patched version, you can temporarily disable the Report anonymous cluster data, which is enabled by default in NeuVector.\nTo change this setting, go to **Settings** \u2192 **Configuration** \u2192 **Report anonymous cluster data** in the NeuVector UI.\n\nDisabling this option prevents NeuVector from sending telemetry data to the telemetry server, which helps mitigate this vulnerability.\n\n\n### References\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n- Reach out to the [SUSE Rancher Security team](https://github.com/rancher/rancher/security/policy) for security related inquiries.\n- Open an issue in the [NeuVector](https://github.com/neuvector/neuvector/issues/new/choose) repository.\n- Verify with our [support matrix](https://www.suse.com/suse-neuvector/support-matrix/all-supported-versions/neuvector-v-all-versions/) and [product support lifecycle](https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/#suse-security).",
"id": "GHSA-qqj3-g7mx-5p4w",
"modified": "2026-07-02T20:30:25Z",
"published": "2025-10-21T20:25:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/neuvector/neuvector/security/advisories/GHSA-qqj3-g7mx-5p4w"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-54470"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/neuvector/neuvector/commit/06424701e69bf1eb76ff90180d78853fded93021"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/neuvector/neuvector/commit/415737cbec581a5dc5f204fac1c78b7f29ad7dc2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2025-54470"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/neuvector/neuvector"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "NeuVector telemetry sender is vulnerable to MITM and DoS"
}
GHSA-QQWX-8PRM-3682
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-14 21:32 – Updated: 2024-11-14 21:32In lunary-ai/lunary version 1.2.7, there is a lack of rate limiting on the forgot password page, leading to an email bombing vulnerability. Attackers can exploit this by automating forgot password requests to flood targeted user accounts with a high volume of password reset emails. This not only overwhelms the victim's mailbox, making it difficult to manage and locate legitimate emails, but also significantly impacts mail servers by consuming their resources. The increased load can cause performance degradation and, in severe cases, make the mail servers unresponsive or unavailable, disrupting email services for the entire organization.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-3760"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-14T19:15:06Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In lunary-ai/lunary version 1.2.7, there is a lack of rate limiting on the forgot password page, leading to an email bombing vulnerability. Attackers can exploit this by automating forgot password requests to flood targeted user accounts with a high volume of password reset emails. This not only overwhelms the victim\u0027s mailbox, making it difficult to manage and locate legitimate emails, but also significantly impacts mail servers by consuming their resources. The increased load can cause performance degradation and, in severe cases, make the mail servers unresponsive or unavailable, disrupting email services for the entire organization.",
"id": "GHSA-qqwx-8prm-3682",
"modified": "2024-11-14T21:32:03Z",
"published": "2024-11-14T21:32:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-3760"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/lunary-ai/lunary/commit/29374bb10020712009c1ec238affe098112a51d6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/c29e9f36-8261-463d-8862-7f4fdcc8eddc"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-QR9Q-882C-GV4J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:03 – Updated: 2023-02-02 21:33A flaw was found in the Restricted Security Context Constraints (SCC), where it allows pods to craft custom network packets. This flaw allows an attacker to cause a denial of service attack on an OpenShift Container Platform cluster if they can deploy pods. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-14336"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-06-02T12:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in the Restricted Security Context Constraints (SCC), where it allows pods to craft custom network packets. This flaw allows an attacker to cause a denial of service attack on an OpenShift Container Platform cluster if they can deploy pods. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability.",
"id": "GHSA-qr9q-882c-gv4j",
"modified": "2023-02-02T21:33:41Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:03:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-14336"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:4298"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:4320"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2020-14336"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858981"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-QRCF-84CJ-MGMG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-02 15:30 – Updated: 2026-01-05 21:30An allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability has been reported to affect several QNAP operating system versions. If a remote attacker gains an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to prevent other systems, applications, or processes from accessing the same type of resource.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following versions: QTS 5.2.7.3256 build 20250913 and later QuTS hero h5.2.7.3256 build 20250913 and later QuTS hero h5.3.1.3250 build 20250912 and later
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-57705"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-02T15:16:03Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability has been reported to affect several QNAP operating system versions. If a remote attacker gains an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to prevent other systems, applications, or processes from accessing the same type of resource.\n\nWe have already fixed the vulnerability in the following versions:\nQTS 5.2.7.3256 build 20250913 and later\nQuTS hero h5.2.7.3256 build 20250913 and later\nQuTS hero h5.3.1.3250 build 20250912 and later",
"id": "GHSA-qrcf-84cj-mgmg",
"modified": "2026-01-05T21:30:31Z",
"published": "2026-01-02T15:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-57705"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qnap.com/en/security-advisory/qsa-25-50"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-QRJV-RF5Q-QPXC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-08-06 05:20 – Updated: 2022-08-06 05:20Impact
Untrusted websocket connections can cause an out-of-memory (OOM) process abort in a client or a server.
The root cause of the issue is during dataframe parsing.
Affected versions would allocate a buffer based on the declared dataframe size, which may come from an untrusted source.
When Vec::with_capacity fails to allocate, the default Rust allocator will abort the current process, killing all threads. This affects only sync (non-Tokio) implementation. Async version also does not limit memory, but does not use with_capacity, so DoS can happen only when bytes for oversized dataframe or message actually got delivered by the attacker.
This is a security concern for you, if - your server application handles untrusted websocket connections - OR your client application connects to untrusted websocket servers
Patches
The crashes are fixed in version 0.26.5 by imposing default dataframe size limits. Affected users are advised to update to this version.
Note that default memory limits are rather large (100MB dataframes and 200 MB messages), so they can still cause DoS in some environments (i.e. 32-bit). New API has been added to fine tune those limits for specific applications.
Workarounds
- Migrate your project to another, maintained Websocket library like Tungstenite.
- Accept only trusted WebSocket traffic.
- Filter the WebSocket traffic though some kind of proxy that ensures sanity limits on messages.
- Handle process aborts gracefully and limit process memory using OS tools.
Credits
This issue was reported by Evan Richter at ForAllSecure and found with Mayhem and Cargo Fuzz.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "websocket"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.26.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-35922"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119",
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-08-06T05:20:00Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-08-01T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Impact\nUntrusted websocket connections can cause an out-of-memory (OOM) process abort in a client or a server.\nThe root cause of the issue is during dataframe parsing.\nAffected versions would allocate a buffer based on the declared dataframe size, which may come from an untrusted source.\nWhen `Vec::with_capacity` fails to allocate, the default Rust allocator will abort the current process, killing all threads. This affects only sync (non-Tokio) implementation. Async version also does not limit memory, but does not use `with_capacity`, so DoS can happen only when bytes for oversized dataframe or message actually got delivered by the attacker.\n\nThis is a security concern for you, if\n- your server application handles untrusted websocket connections\n- OR your client application connects to untrusted websocket servers\n\n## Patches\nThe crashes are fixed in version **0.26.5** by imposing default dataframe size limits.\nAffected users are advised to update to this version.\n\nNote that default memory limits are rather large (100MB dataframes and 200 MB messages), so they can still cause DoS in some environments (i.e. 32-bit). New API has been added to fine tune those limits for specific applications.\n\n### Workarounds\n\n* Migrate your project to another, maintained Websocket library like Tungstenite.\n* Accept only trusted WebSocket traffic.\n* Filter the WebSocket traffic though some kind of proxy that ensures sanity limits on messages.\n* Handle process aborts gracefully and limit process memory using OS tools.\n\n\n## Credits\nThis issue was reported by [Evan Richter](https://github.com/evanrichter) at ForAllSecure and found with [Mayhem](https://forallsecure.com/mayhem-for-code) and [Cargo Fuzz](https://github.com/rust-fuzz/cargo-fuzz).\n",
"id": "GHSA-qrjv-rf5q-qpxc",
"modified": "2022-08-06T05:20:00Z",
"published": "2022-08-06T05:20:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/websockets-rs/rust-websocket/security/advisories/GHSA-qrjv-rf5q-qpxc"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-35922"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/websockets-rs/rust-websocket/commit/cbf6e9983e839d2ecad86de8cd1b3f20ed43390b"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/websockets-rs/rust-websocket"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4V2EOOU5OLEHVMKAH6BALQXKDKIZRXCI"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HYPNCM4H4OFBIZI6XMJ2DUTS54FT2TWP"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2022-0035.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Rust-WebSocket memory allocation based on untrusted length"
}
GHSA-QRVQ-68C2-7GRW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-24 16:04 – Updated: 2026-02-27 20:03Impact
The WebSockets handling of NATS messages handles compressed messages via the WebSockets negotiated compression. The implementation bound the memory size of a NATS message but did not independently bound the memory consumption of the memory stream when constructing a NATS message which might then fail validation for size reasons.
An attacker can use a compression bomb to cause excessive memory consumption, often resulting in the operating system terminating the server process.
The use of compression is negotiated before authentication, so this does not require valid NATS credentials to exploit.
The fix was to bounds the decompression to fail once the message was too large, instead of continuing on.
Patches
This was released in nats-server without being highlighted as a security issue. It should have been, this was an oversight. Per the NATS security policy, because this does not require a valid user, it is CVE-worthy.
This was fixed in the v2.11 series with v2.11.12 and in the v2.12 series with v2.12.3.
Workarounds
This only affects deployments which use WebSockets and which expose the network port to untrusted end-points.
References
This was reported to the NATS maintainers by Pavel Kohout of Aisle Research (www.aisle.com).
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/nats-io/nats-server/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.11.12"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/nats-io/nats-server/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.12.0-RC.1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.12.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/nats-io/nats-server"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "1.4.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27571"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-409",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-24T16:04:53Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-24T17:29:03Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nThe WebSockets handling of NATS messages handles compressed messages via the WebSockets negotiated compression. The implementation bound the memory size of a NATS message but did not independently bound the memory consumption of the memory stream when constructing a NATS message which might then fail validation for size reasons.\n\nAn attacker can use a compression bomb to cause excessive memory consumption, often resulting in the operating system terminating the server process.\n\nThe use of compression is negotiated before authentication, so this does not require valid NATS credentials to exploit.\n\nThe fix was to bounds the decompression to fail once the message was too large, instead of continuing on.\n\n### Patches\n\nThis was released in nats-server without being highlighted as a security issue. It should have been, this was an oversight. Per the NATS security policy, because this does not require a valid user, it is CVE-worthy.\n\nThis was fixed in the v2.11 series with v2.11.12 and in the v2.12 series with v2.12.3.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nThis only affects deployments which use WebSockets and which expose the network port to untrusted end-points.\n\n### References\n\nThis was reported to the NATS maintainers by Pavel Kohout of Aisle Research (www.aisle.com).",
"id": "GHSA-qrvq-68c2-7grw",
"modified": "2026-02-27T20:03:26Z",
"published": "2026-02-24T16:04:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/security/advisories/GHSA-qrvq-68c2-7grw"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27571"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/commit/f77fb7c4535e6727cc1a2899cd8e6bbdd8ba2017"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/releases/tag/v2.11.12"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/releases/tag/v2.12.3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2026-4533"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "nats-server websockets are vulnerable to pre-auth memory DoS"
}
GHSA-QRXP-8P29-CP78
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:48 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:48An issue was discovered in Free Lossless Image Format (FLIF) 0.3. The Plane function in image/image.hpp allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (attempted excessive memory allocation) via a crafted file.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-10971"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-05-10T15:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Free Lossless Image Format (FLIF) 0.3. The Plane function in image/image.hpp allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (attempted excessive memory allocation) via a crafted file.",
"id": "GHSA-qrxp-8p29-cp78",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:48:59Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:48:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-10971"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FLIF-hub/FLIF/issues/501"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Mitigation
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Mitigation
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place, and it will help the administrator to identify who is committing the abuse. The login application should be protected against DoS attacks as much as possible. Limiting the database access, perhaps by caching result sets, can help minimize the resources expended. To further limit the potential for a DoS attack, consider tracking the rate of requests received from users and blocking requests that exceed a defined rate threshold.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation
- Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:
- The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.
- The second solution can be difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply requires more resources on the part of the attacker.
- recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, typically by using increasing time delays
- uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Mitigation
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
Mitigation MIT-38.1
- If the program must fail, ensure that it fails gracefully (fails closed). There may be a temptation to simply let the program fail poorly in cases such as low memory conditions, but an attacker may be able to assert control before the software has fully exited. Alternately, an uncontrolled failure could cause cascading problems with other downstream components; for example, the program could send a signal to a downstream process so the process immediately knows that a problem has occurred and has a better chance of recovery.
- Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.
Mitigation MIT-47
Strategy: Resource Limitation
- Use quotas or other resource-limiting settings provided by the operating system or environment. For example, when managing system resources in POSIX, setrlimit() can be used to set limits for certain types of resources, and getrlimit() can determine how many resources are available. However, these functions are not available on all operating systems.
- When the current levels get close to the maximum that is defined for the application (see CWE-770), then limit the allocation of further resources to privileged users; alternately, begin releasing resources for less-privileged users. While this mitigation may protect the system from attack, it will not necessarily stop attackers from adversely impacting other users.
- Ensure that the application performs the appropriate error checks and error handling in case resources become unavailable (CWE-703).
CAPEC-125: Flooding
An adversary consumes the resources of a target by rapidly engaging in a large number of interactions with the target. This type of attack generally exposes a weakness in rate limiting or flow. When successful this attack prevents legitimate users from accessing the service and can cause the target to crash. This attack differs from resource depletion through leaks or allocations in that the latter attacks do not rely on the volume of requests made to the target but instead focus on manipulation of the target's operations. The key factor in a flooding attack is the number of requests the adversary can make in a given period of time. The greater this number, the more likely an attack is to succeed against a given target.
CAPEC-130: Excessive Allocation
An adversary causes the target to allocate excessive resources to servicing the attackers' request, thereby reducing the resources available for legitimate services and degrading or denying services. Usually, this attack focuses on memory allocation, but any finite resource on the target could be the attacked, including bandwidth, processing cycles, or other resources. This attack does not attempt to force this allocation through a large number of requests (that would be Resource Depletion through Flooding) but instead uses one or a small number of requests that are carefully formatted to force the target to allocate excessive resources to service this request(s). Often this attack takes advantage of a bug in the target to cause the target to allocate resources vastly beyond what would be needed for a normal request.
CAPEC-147: XML Ping of the Death
An attacker initiates a resource depletion attack where a large number of small XML messages are delivered at a sufficiently rapid rate to cause a denial of service or crash of the target. Transactions such as repetitive SOAP transactions can deplete resources faster than a simple flooding attack because of the additional resources used by the SOAP protocol and the resources necessary to process SOAP messages. The transactions used are immaterial as long as they cause resource utilization on the target. In other words, this is a normal flooding attack augmented by using messages that will require extra processing on the target.
CAPEC-197: Exponential Data Expansion
An adversary submits data to a target application which contains nested exponential data expansion to produce excessively large output. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. However, this capability can be abused to create excessive demands on a processor's CPU and memory. A small number of nested expansions can result in an exponential growth in demands on memory.
CAPEC-229: Serialized Data Parameter Blowup
This attack exploits certain serialized data parsers (e.g., XML, YAML, etc.) which manage data in an inefficient manner. The attacker crafts an serialized data file with multiple configuration parameters in the same dataset. In a vulnerable parser, this results in a denial of service condition where CPU resources are exhausted because of the parsing algorithm. The weakness being exploited is tied to parser implementation and not language specific.
CAPEC-230: Serialized Data with Nested Payloads
Applications often need to transform data in and out of a data format (e.g., XML and YAML) by using a parser. It may be possible for an adversary to inject data that may have an adverse effect on the parser when it is being processed. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. By nesting these structures, causing the data to be repeatedly substituted, an adversary can cause the parser to consume more resources while processing, causing excessive memory consumption and CPU utilization.
CAPEC-231: Oversized Serialized Data Payloads
An adversary injects oversized serialized data payloads into a parser during data processing to produce adverse effects upon the parser such as exhausting system resources and arbitrary code execution.
CAPEC-469: HTTP DoS
An attacker performs flooding at the HTTP level to bring down only a particular web application rather than anything listening on a TCP/IP connection. This denial of service attack requires substantially fewer packets to be sent which makes DoS harder to detect. This is an equivalent of SYN flood in HTTP. The idea is to keep the HTTP session alive indefinitely and then repeat that hundreds of times. This attack targets resource depletion weaknesses in web server software. The web server will wait to attacker's responses on the initiated HTTP sessions while the connection threads are being exhausted.
CAPEC-482: TCP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the TCP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service. These attacks exploit the weakness within the TCP protocol where there is some state information for the connection the server needs to maintain. This often involves the use of TCP SYN messages.
CAPEC-486: UDP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the UDP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming the available network bandwidth. Additionally, firewalls often open a port for each UDP connection destined for a service with an open UDP port, meaning the firewalls in essence save the connection state thus the high packet nature of a UDP flood can also overwhelm resources allocated to the firewall. UDP attacks can also target services like DNS or VoIP which utilize these protocols. Additionally, due to the session-less nature of the UDP protocol, the source of a packet is easily spoofed making it difficult to find the source of the attack.
CAPEC-487: ICMP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the ICMP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming the available network bandwidth. A typical attack involves a victim server receiving ICMP packets at a high rate from a wide range of source addresses. Additionally, due to the session-less nature of the ICMP protocol, the source of a packet is easily spoofed making it difficult to find the source of the attack.
CAPEC-488: HTTP Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the HTTP protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming resources at the application layer such as web services and their infrastructure. These attacks use legitimate session-based HTTP GET requests designed to consume large amounts of a server's resources. Since these are legitimate sessions this attack is very difficult to detect.
CAPEC-489: SSL Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using the SSL protocol with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a service by consuming all the available resources on the server side. These attacks take advantage of the asymmetric relationship between the processing power used by the client and the processing power used by the server to create a secure connection. In this manner the attacker can make a large number of HTTPS requests on a low provisioned machine to tie up a disproportionately large number of resources on the server. The clients then continue to keep renegotiating the SSL connection. When multiplied by a large number of attacking machines, this attack can result in a crash or loss of service to legitimate users.
CAPEC-490: Amplification
An adversary may execute an amplification where the size of a response is far greater than that of the request that generates it. The goal of this attack is to use a relatively few resources to create a large amount of traffic against a target server. To execute this attack, an adversary send a request to a 3rd party service, spoofing the source address to be that of the target server. The larger response that is generated by the 3rd party service is then sent to the target server. By sending a large number of initial requests, the adversary can generate a tremendous amount of traffic directed at the target. The greater the discrepancy in size between the initial request and the final payload delivered to the target increased the effectiveness of this attack.
CAPEC-491: Quadratic Data Expansion
An adversary exploits macro-like substitution to cause a denial of service situation due to excessive memory being allocated to fully expand the data. The result of this denial of service could cause the application to freeze or crash. This involves defining a very large entity and using it multiple times in a single entity substitution. CAPEC-197 is a similar attack pattern, but it is easier to discover and defend against. This attack pattern does not perform multi-level substitution and therefore does not obviously appear to consume extensive resources.
CAPEC-493: SOAP Array Blowup
An adversary may execute an attack on a web service that uses SOAP messages in communication. By sending a very large SOAP array declaration to the web service, the attacker forces the web service to allocate space for the array elements before they are parsed by the XML parser. The attacker message is typically small in size containing a large array declaration of say 1,000,000 elements and a couple of array elements. This attack targets exhaustion of the memory resources of the web service.
CAPEC-494: TCP Fragmentation
An adversary may execute a TCP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of avoiding filtering rules of network controls, by attempting to fragment the TCP packet such that the headers flag field is pushed into the second fragment which typically is not filtered.
CAPEC-495: UDP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a UDP Fragmentation attack against a target server in an attempt to consume resources such as bandwidth and CPU. IP fragmentation occurs when an IP datagram is larger than the MTU of the route the datagram has to traverse. Typically the attacker will use large UDP packets over 1500 bytes of data which forces fragmentation as ethernet MTU is 1500 bytes. This attack is a variation on a typical UDP flood but it enables more network bandwidth to be consumed with fewer packets. Additionally it has the potential to consume server CPU resources and fill memory buffers associated with the processing and reassembling of fragmented packets.
CAPEC-496: ICMP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a ICMP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of consuming resources or causing a crash. The attacker crafts a large number of identical fragmented IP packets containing a portion of a fragmented ICMP message. The attacker these sends these messages to a target host which causes the host to become non-responsive. Another vector may be sending a fragmented ICMP message to a target host with incorrect sizes in the header which causes the host to hang.
CAPEC-528: XML Flood
An adversary may execute a flooding attack using XML messages with the intent to deny legitimate users access to a web service. These attacks are accomplished by sending a large number of XML based requests and letting the service attempt to parse each one. In many cases this type of an attack will result in a XML Denial of Service (XDoS) due to an application becoming unstable, freezing, or crashing.