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.
3021 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-W9WP-H8WV-79JX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-25 18:40 – Updated: 2026-06-25 18:40Summary
BaggagePropagator::extract_with_context in opentelemetry_sdk did not enforce the W3C Baggage size limits before parsing an inbound baggage header. A large attacker-controlled header could cause unnecessary CPU work and short-lived heap allocations while parsing entries that would later be discarded by the SDK's baggage storage limits.
The SDK now applies limits aligned with the W3C Baggage limits:
- 64 list-members
- 8192 bytes total
Impact
Services that accept untrusted inbound propagation headers may experience increased per-request resource usage when processing oversized baggage headers. This can contribute to denial-of-service risk, especially when application or transport-level header limits are absent or configured above the W3C Baggage limits.
The impact is limited to availability. This issue does not expose telemetry data, modify telemetry data, or allow code execution.
Patches
Upgrade opentelemetry_sdk to version 0.32.1 or later.
Version 0.32.1 rejects baggage header values larger than 8192 bytes and limits extraction to the first 64 list-members.
## Workarounds
If upgrading immediately is not possible, reject or limit inbound baggage headers larger than 8192 bytes before invoking OpenTelemetry propagation extraction. This can be enforced at a proxy, gateway, middleware layer, or custom carrier boundary.
Resources
- W3C Baggage limits: https://www.w3.org/TR/baggage/#limits
- Related OpenTelemetry Java advisory: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java/security/advisories/GHSA-rcgg-9c38-7xpx
- Related OpenTelemetry Go advisory: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go/security/advisories/GHSA-mh2q-q3fh-2475
- CVE-2026-48504
Credit
tonghuaroot
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.32.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "opentelemetry_sdk"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.32.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-48504"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-25T18:40:04Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\n`BaggagePropagator::extract_with_context` in `opentelemetry_sdk` did not enforce the W3C Baggage size limits before parsing an inbound `baggage` header. A large attacker-controlled header could cause unnecessary CPU work and short-lived heap allocations while parsing entries that would later be discarded by the SDK\u0027s baggage storage limits.\n\nThe SDK now applies limits aligned with the W3C Baggage limits:\n\n - 64 list-members\n - 8192 bytes total\n\n## Impact\n\nServices that accept untrusted inbound propagation headers may experience increased per-request resource usage when processing oversized `baggage` headers. This can contribute to denial-of-service risk, especially when application or transport-level header limits are absent or configured above the W3C Baggage limits.\n \nThe impact is limited to availability. This issue does not expose telemetry data, modify telemetry data, or allow code execution.\n\n## Patches\n\nUpgrade `opentelemetry_sdk` to version `0.32.1` or later.\n\nVersion `0.32.1` rejects `baggage` header values larger than 8192 bytes and limits extraction to the first 64 list-members.\n\n ## Workarounds\n\nIf upgrading immediately is not possible, reject or limit inbound `baggage` headers larger than 8192 bytes before invoking OpenTelemetry propagation extraction. This can be enforced at a proxy, gateway, middleware layer, or custom carrier boundary.\n\n## Resources\n\n - W3C Baggage limits: https://www.w3.org/TR/baggage/#limits\n - Related OpenTelemetry Java advisory: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java/security/advisories/GHSA-rcgg-9c38-7xpx\n - Related OpenTelemetry Go advisory: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go/security/advisories/GHSA-mh2q-q3fh-2475\n - CVE-2026-48504\n\n## Credit\n\ntonghuaroot",
"id": "GHSA-w9wp-h8wv-79jx",
"modified": "2026-06-25T18:40:05Z",
"published": "2026-06-25T18:40:04Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust/security/advisories/GHSA-w9wp-h8wv-79jx"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "opentelemetry_sdk has unbounded memory allocation in W3C Baggage propagation"
}
GHSA-WCG2-65XP-2WC2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-06-29 00:00 – Updated: 2022-07-08 00:00The GetHintFormat function in GPAC 1.0.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted file in the MP4Box command.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-40609"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-06-28T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The GetHintFormat function in GPAC 1.0.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted file in the MP4Box command.",
"id": "GHSA-wcg2-65xp-2wc2",
"modified": "2022-07-08T00:00:44Z",
"published": "2022-06-29T00:00:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-40609"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gpac/gpac/issues/1894"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2023/dsa-5411"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-WCG3-V8J6-C8GG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-21 21:30 – Updated: 2025-01-21 21:30Vulnerability in the Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5 product of Oracle Hospitality Applications (component: Opera Servlet). Supported versions that are affected are 5.6.19.20, 5.6.25.8, 5.6.26.6 and 5.6.27.1. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5 accessible data and unauthorized ability to cause a hang or frequently repeatable crash (complete DOS) of Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.1 (Confidentiality and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-21547"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-21T21:15:21Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Vulnerability in the Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5 product of Oracle Hospitality Applications (component: Opera Servlet). Supported versions that are affected are 5.6.19.20, 5.6.25.8, 5.6.26.6 and 5.6.27.1. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5 accessible data and unauthorized ability to cause a hang or frequently repeatable crash (complete DOS) of Oracle Hospitality OPERA 5. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.1 (Confidentiality and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H).",
"id": "GHSA-wcg3-v8j6-c8gg",
"modified": "2025-01-21T21:30:56Z",
"published": "2025-01-21T21:30:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21547"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujan2025.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-WCM8-86X6-8MV3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-08-10 00:00 – Updated: 2026-05-19 16:10It is possible for a Reader to consume memory beyond the allowed constraints and thus lead to out of memory on the system. This issue affects Rust applications using Apache Avro Rust SDK prior to 0.14.0 (previously known as avro-rs). Users should update to apache-avro version 0.14.0 which addresses this issue.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "apache-avro"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.14.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-36124"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-08-30T20:05:09Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-08-09T07:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "It is possible for a Reader to consume memory beyond the allowed constraints and thus lead to out of memory on the system. This issue affects Rust applications using Apache Avro Rust SDK prior to 0.14.0 (previously known as avro-rs). Users should update to apache-avro version 0.14.0 which addresses this issue.",
"id": "GHSA-wcm8-86x6-8mv3",
"modified": "2026-05-19T16:10:36Z",
"published": "2022-08-10T00:00:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-36124"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/a0x8o/avro"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/avro/PYSEC-2022-43180.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/kj429rzo1xxjgz058qqqg0y7c0p512zo"
}
],
"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": "Apache Avro Rust SDK\u0027s Reader could consume memory beyond allowed constraints"
}
GHSA-WCW9-47FP-RRFR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-30 00:31 – Updated: 2025-11-05 00:31The Reader.ReadResponse function constructs a response string through repeated string concatenation of lines. When the number of lines in a response is large, this can cause excessive CPU consumption.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-61724"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-29T23:16:20Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Reader.ReadResponse function constructs a response string through repeated string concatenation of lines. When the number of lines in a response is large, this can cause excessive CPU consumption.",
"id": "GHSA-wcw9-47fp-rrfr",
"modified": "2025-11-05T00:31:32Z",
"published": "2025-10-30T00:31:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-61724"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://go.dev/cl/709859"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://go.dev/issue/75716"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://groups.google.com/g/golang-announce/c/4Emdl2iQ_bI"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2025-4015"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2025/10/08/1"
}
],
"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-WCWG-C5FC-9VRC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-11 12:32 – Updated: 2026-07-01 15:34vLLM versions 0.8.0 and later are vulnerable to an Out-of-Memory (OOM) Denial of Service (DoS) attack due to unbounded frame count processing in the VideoMediaIO.load_base64() method. When processing video/jpeg data URLs, the method splits the base64 data string on commas to extract individual JPEG frames without enforcing a frame count limit. An attacker can exploit this by crafting a single API request containing thousands of comma-separated base64-encoded JPEG frames in a data URL, causing the server to decode all frames into memory and crash due to excessive memory consumption. This vulnerability is reachable via the OpenAI-compatible chat completions API and does not require authentication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-5497"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-11T10:16:21Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "vLLM versions 0.8.0 and later are vulnerable to an Out-of-Memory (OOM) Denial of Service (DoS) attack due to unbounded frame count processing in the `VideoMediaIO.load_base64()` method. When processing `video/jpeg` data URLs, the method splits the base64 data string on commas to extract individual JPEG frames without enforcing a frame count limit. An attacker can exploit this by crafting a single API request containing thousands of comma-separated base64-encoded JPEG frames in a data URL, causing the server to decode all frames into memory and crash due to excessive memory consumption. This vulnerability is reachable via the OpenAI-compatible chat completions API and does not require authentication.",
"id": "GHSA-wcwg-c5fc-9vrc",
"modified": "2026-07-01T15:34:53Z",
"published": "2026-06-11T12:32:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-5497"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/58ee61422169ce17e08248f8efa1e9df434fe395"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:33524"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:33531"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-5497"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2487813"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/7bd92629-b396-4449-8f88-6c0092530eb4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-5497.json"
}
],
"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-WF67-6VJ2-5392
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-14 15:31 – Updated: 2024-08-20 21:30In BIG-IP tenants running on r2000 and r4000 series hardware, or BIG-IP Virtual Edition (VEs) using Intel E810 SR-IOV NIC, undisclosed traffic can cause an increase in memory resource utilization.
Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-41727"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-08-14T15:15:27Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In BIG-IP tenants running on r2000 and r4000 series hardware, or BIG-IP Virtual Edition (VEs) using Intel E810 SR-IOV NIC, undisclosed traffic can cause an increase in memory resource utilization.\u00a0\u00a0\n\nNote: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.",
"id": "GHSA-wf67-6vj2-5392",
"modified": "2024-08-20T21:30:31Z",
"published": "2024-08-14T15:31:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-41727"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K000138833"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/E:X/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-WFR4-8J34-XJ5H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-04 15:30 – Updated: 2026-06-04 15:30Dell BSAFE SSL-J contains an allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-46638"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-04T14:16:34Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Dell BSAFE SSL-J contains an allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).",
"id": "GHSA-wfr4-8j34-xj5h",
"modified": "2026-06-04T15:30:39Z",
"published": "2026-06-04T15:30:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-46638"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000398976/dsa-2025-432-security-update-for-dell-bsafe-ssl-j-vulnerability"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-WG4X-HF94-FJ5V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:09 – Updated: 2025-07-14 16:26The Flags module before version 5.0.11 in Liferay Portal 7.3.1 and earlier, and Liferay DXP 7.0 before fix pack 96, 7.1 before fix pack 20, and 7.2 before fix pack 5, does not limit the rate at which content can be flagged as inappropriate, which allows remote authenticated users to spam the site administrator with emails
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.liferay:com.liferay.flags.taglib"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.liferay.portal:release.dxp.bom"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.0.10.fp96"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.liferay.portal:release.dxp.bom"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.1.10.fp20"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.liferay.portal:release.dxp.bom"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.2.10.fp5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-33320"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-07-14T16:26:51Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2021-08-03T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Flags module before version 5.0.11 in Liferay Portal 7.3.1 and earlier, and Liferay DXP 7.0 before fix pack 96, 7.1 before fix pack 20, and 7.2 before fix pack 5, does not limit the rate at which content can be flagged as inappropriate, which allows remote authenticated users to spam the site administrator with emails",
"id": "GHSA-wg4x-hf94-fj5v",
"modified": "2025-07-14T16:26:52Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:09:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-33320"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/liferay/liferay-portal"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.liferay.com/browse/LPE-17007"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://liferay.dev/portal/security/known-vulnerabilities/-/asset_publisher/jekt/content/cve-2021-33320-flagging-content-as-inappropriate-is-not-rate-limited?p_r_p_assetEntryId=121611464\u0026_com_liferay_asset_publisher_web_portlet_AssetPublisherPortlet_INSTANCE_jekt_redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fliferay.dev%3A443%2Fportal%2Fsecurity%2Fknown-vulnerabilities%3Fp_p_id%3Dcom_liferay_asset_publisher_web_portlet_AssetPublisherPortlet_INSTANCE_jekt%26p_p_lifecycle%3D0%26p_p_state%3Dnormal%26p_p_mode%3Dview%26p_r_p_assetEntryId%3D121611464%26_com_liferay_asset_publisher_web_portlet_AssetPublisherPortlet_INSTANCE_jekt_cur%3D0%26p_r_p_resetCur%3Dfalse"
}
],
"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:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Liferay Portal and Liferay DXP vulnerable to email spam via lack of flagging rate"
}
GHSA-WGC6-9F6W-H8HX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-17 21:32 – Updated: 2025-06-18 17:11Withdrawn Advisory
This advisory has been withdrawn because the proof of concept does not demonstrate a practical security impact. This link is maintained to preserve external references.
Original Description
A denial of service (DoS) vulnerability has been identified in the JavaScript library microlight version 0.0.7. This library, used for syntax highlighting, does not limit the size of textual content it processes in HTML elements with the microlight class. When excessively large content (e.g., 100 million characters) is processed, the reset function in microlight.js consumes excessive memory and CPU resources, causing browser crashes or unresponsiveness. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by tricking a user into visiting a malicious web page containing a microlight element with large content, resulting in a denial of service.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "microlight"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "0.0.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-45526"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-06-17T22:36:41Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-06-17T20:15:32Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "## Withdrawn Advisory\nThis advisory has been withdrawn because the proof of concept does not demonstrate a practical security impact. This link is maintained to preserve external references.\n\n## Original Description\nA denial of service (DoS) vulnerability has been identified in the JavaScript library microlight version 0.0.7. This library, used for syntax highlighting, does not limit the size of textual content it processes in HTML elements with the microlight class. When excessively large content (e.g., 100 million characters) is processed, the reset function in microlight.js consumes excessive memory and CPU resources, causing browser crashes or unresponsiveness. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by tricking a user into visiting a malicious web page containing a microlight element with large content, resulting in a denial of service.",
"id": "GHSA-wgc6-9f6w-h8hx",
"modified": "2025-06-18T17:11:34Z",
"published": "2025-06-17T21:32:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-45526"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/github/advisory-database/pull/5730"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/Rootingg/483b09b760d031b62b172f2153f3ed2a"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/asvd/microlight"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Withdrawn Advisory: microlight allows a denial of service",
"withdrawn": "2025-06-18T17:11:34Z"
}
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.