CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2016-0747

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Feb 15, 2016 | Modified: Apr 12, 2025
CVSS 3.x
5.3
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
4.3 MODERATE
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

The resolver in nginx before 1.8.1 and 1.9.x before 1.9.10 does not properly limit CNAME resolution, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (worker process resource consumption) via vectors related to arbitrary name resolution.

Weakness

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Nginx F5 0.6.18 (including) 1.8.1 (excluding)
Nginx F5 1.9.0 (including) 1.9.10 (excluding)
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el6 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.6 EUS RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el6 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.7 EUS RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el6 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el7 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 EUS RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el7 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.2 EUS RedHat rh-nginx18-nginx-1:1.8.1-1.el7 *
Nginx Ubuntu devel *
Nginx Ubuntu esm-infra-legacy/trusty *
Nginx Ubuntu esm-infra/xenial *
Nginx Ubuntu precise *
Nginx Ubuntu trusty *
Nginx Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Nginx Ubuntu upstream *
Nginx Ubuntu vivid *
Nginx Ubuntu wily *
Nginx Ubuntu xenial *
Nginx Ubuntu yakkety *
Nginx Ubuntu zesty *

Potential Mitigations

  • 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 is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.

References