GHSA-7XX3-M584-X994

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2019-12-05 19:26 – Updated: 2021-01-08 19:12
VLAI?
Summary
A poorly-behaved client could use keepalive requests to monopolize Puma's reactor and create a denial of service attack
Details

Keepalive thread overload/DoS

Impact

A poorly-behaved client could use keepalive requests to monopolize Puma's reactor and create a denial of service attack.

If more keepalive connections to Puma are opened than there are threads available, additional connections will wait permanently if the attacker sends requests frequently enough.

Patches

This vulnerability is patched in Puma 4.3.1 and 3.12.2.

Workarounds

Reverse proxies in front of Puma could be configured to always allow less than X keepalive connections to a Puma cluster or process, where X is the number of threads configured in Puma's thread pool.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

  • Open an issue at puma.
Severity ?
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "RubyGems",
        "name": "puma"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.12.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "RubyGems",
        "name": "puma"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.3.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2019-16770"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-770"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2020-06-16T21:23:51Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2019-12-05T20:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Keepalive thread overload/DoS\n\n### Impact\n\nA poorly-behaved client could use keepalive requests to monopolize Puma\u0027s reactor and create a denial of service attack.\n\nIf more keepalive connections to Puma are opened than there are threads available, additional connections will wait permanently if the attacker sends requests frequently enough.\n\n### Patches\n\nThis vulnerability is patched in Puma 4.3.1 and 3.12.2.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nReverse proxies in front of Puma could be configured to always allow less than X keepalive connections to a Puma cluster or process, where X is the number of threads configured in Puma\u0027s thread pool.\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n\n* Open an issue at [puma](github.com/puma/puma).",
  "id": "GHSA-7xx3-m584-x994",
  "modified": "2021-01-08T19:12:47Z",
  "published": "2019-12-05T19:26:37Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/puma/puma/security/advisories/GHSA-7xx3-m584-x994"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-16770"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-7xx3-m584-x994"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/puma/CVE-2019-16770.yml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2022/05/msg00034.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"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "A poorly-behaved client could use keepalive requests to monopolize Puma\u0027s reactor and create a denial of service attack"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.