GSD-2022-2053
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:19Details
When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow's AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in "All workers are in error state" and mod_cluster responds "503 Service Unavailable" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the "retry" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has "forcerecovery" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding "503 Service Unavailable". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2.
Aliases
Aliases
{
"GSD": {
"alias": "CVE-2022-2053",
"description": "When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow\u0027s AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in \"All workers are in error state\" and mod_cluster responds \"503 Service Unavailable\" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the \"retry\" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has \"forcerecovery\" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding \"503 Service Unavailable\". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2.",
"id": "GSD-2022-2053",
"references": [
"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:6821",
"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:6822",
"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:6823",
"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:6825",
"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:8652"
]
},
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-2053"
],
"details": "When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow\u0027s AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in \"All workers are in error state\" and mod_cluster responds \"503 Service Unavailable\" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the \"retry\" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has \"forcerecovery\" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding \"503 Service Unavailable\". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2.",
"id": "GSD-2022-2053",
"modified": "2023-12-13T01:19:20.086817Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "secalert@redhat.com",
"ID": "CVE-2022-2053",
"STATE": "PUBLIC"
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "Undertow",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_value": "Fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "n/a"
}
]
}
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow\u0027s AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in \"All workers are in error state\" and mod_cluster responds \"503 Service Unavailable\" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the \"retry\" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has \"forcerecovery\" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding \"503 Service Unavailable\". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "CWE-400"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095862\u0026comment#0",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095862\u0026comment#0"
},
{
"name": "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/UNDERTOW-2133",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/UNDERTOW-2133"
}
]
}
},
"gitlab.com": {
"advisories": [
{
"affected_range": "(,2.2.19),[2.3.0]",
"affected_versions": "All versions before 2.2.19, version 2.3.0",
"cvss_v3": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1035",
"CWE-400",
"CWE-937"
],
"date": "2022-08-11",
"description": "When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow\u0027s AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in \"All workers are in error state\" and mod_cluster responds \"503 Service Unavailable\" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the \"retry\" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has \"forcerecovery\" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding \"503 Service Unavailable\". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2.",
"fixed_versions": [
"2.2.19"
],
"identifier": "CVE-2022-2053",
"identifiers": [
"CVE-2022-2053"
],
"not_impacted": "",
"package_slug": "maven/io.undertow/undertow-core",
"pubdate": "2022-08-05",
"solution": "Upgrade to version 2.2.19 or above.",
"title": "Uncontrolled Resource Consumption",
"urls": [
"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-2053",
"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095862\u0026comment#0",
"https://issues.redhat.com/browse/UNDERTOW-2133"
],
"uuid": "d7b534c9-1cd9-4da0-b89c-85822497b00e"
}
]
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"configurations": {
"CVE_data_version": "4.0",
"nodes": [
{
"children": [],
"cpe_match": [
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:redhat:jboss_fuse:7.0.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:redhat:integration_camel_k:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:redhat:undertow:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndExcluding": "2.2.19",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:redhat:undertow:2.3.0:alpha1:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
]
},
"cve": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "secalert@redhat.com",
"ID": "CVE-2022-2053"
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "When a POST request comes through AJP and the request exceeds the max-post-size limit (maxEntitySize), Undertow\u0027s AjpServerRequestConduit implementation closes a connection without sending any response to the client/proxy. This behavior results in that a front-end proxy marking the backend worker (application server) as an error state and not forward requests to the worker for a while. In mod_cluster, this continues until the next STATUS request (10 seconds intervals) from the application server updates the server state. So, in the worst case, it can result in \"All workers are in error state\" and mod_cluster responds \"503 Service Unavailable\" for a while (up to 10 seconds). In mod_proxy_balancer, it does not forward requests to the worker until the \"retry\" timeout passes. However, luckily, mod_proxy_balancer has \"forcerecovery\" setting (On by default; this parameter can force the immediate recovery of all workers without considering the retry parameter of the workers if all workers of a balancer are in error state.). So, unlike mod_cluster, mod_proxy_balancer does not result in responding \"503 Service Unavailable\". An attacker could use this behavior to send a malicious request and trigger server errors, resulting in DoS (denial of service). This flaw was fixed in Undertow 2.2.19.Final, Undertow 2.3.0.Alpha2."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-400"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095862\u0026comment#0",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Issue Tracking",
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095862\u0026comment#0"
},
{
"name": "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/UNDERTOW-2133",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/UNDERTOW-2133"
}
]
}
},
"impact": {
"baseMetricV3": {
"cvssV3": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 3.6
}
},
"lastModifiedDate": "2022-08-11T14:06Z",
"publishedDate": "2022-08-05T16:15Z"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
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.
Loading…
Loading…