CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2020-9490

Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

Published: Aug 07, 2020 | Modified: Nov 07, 2023
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.5 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.20 to 2.4.43. A specially crafted value for the Cache-Digest header in a HTTP/2 request would result in a crash when the server actually tries to HTTP/2 PUSH a resource afterwards. Configuring the HTTP/2 feature via H2Push off will mitigate this vulnerability for unpatched servers.

Weakness

The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Http_server Apache 2.4.20 (including) 2.4.46 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat httpd:2.4-8020020200824162909.4cda2c84 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.0 Update Services for SAP Solutions RedHat httpd:2.4-8000020200825105249.f8e95b4e *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1 Extended Update Support RedHat httpd:2.4-8010020200824180659.c27ad7f8 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat httpd24-httpd-0:2.4.34-18.el6.1 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat httpd24-httpd-0:2.4.34-18.el7.1 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.6 EUS RedHat httpd24-httpd-0:2.4.34-18.el7.1 *
Red Hat Software Collections for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.7 EUS RedHat httpd24-httpd-0:2.4.34-18.el7.1 *
Apache2 Ubuntu bionic *
Apache2 Ubuntu devel *
Apache2 Ubuntu focal *
Apache2 Ubuntu trusty *
Apache2 Ubuntu upstream *

Extended Description

HTTP requests or responses (“messages”) can be malformed or unexpected in ways that cause web servers or clients to interpret the messages in different ways than intermediary HTTP agents such as load balancers, reverse proxies, web caching proxies, application firewalls, etc. For example, an adversary may be able to add duplicate or different header fields that a client or server might interpret as one set of messages, whereas the intermediary might interpret the same sequence of bytes as a different set of messages. For example, discrepancies can arise in how to handle duplicate headers like two Transfer-encoding (TE) or two Content-length (CL), or the malicious HTTP message will have different headers for TE and CL. The inconsistent parsing and interpretation of messages can allow the adversary to “smuggle” a message to the client/server without the intermediary being aware of it. This weakness is usually the result of the usage of outdated or incompatible HTTP protocol versions in the HTTP agents.

Potential Mitigations

References