CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2023-27530

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Mar 10, 2023 | Modified: Feb 13, 2025
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
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

A DoS vulnerability exists in Rack <v3.0.4.2, <v2.2.6.3, <v2.1.4.3 and <v2.0.9.3 within in the Multipart MIME parsing code in which could allow an attacker to craft requests that can be abuse to cause multipart parsing to take longer than expected.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Rack Rack * 2.0.9.3 (excluding)
Rack Rack 2.1.0 (including) 2.1.4.3 (excluding)
Rack Rack 2.2.0 (including) 2.2.6.3 (excluding)
Rack Rack 3.0.0 (including) 3.0.4.2 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat pcs-0:0.10.15-4.el8_8.1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support RedHat pcs-0:0.10.8-1.el8_4.4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Extended Update Support RedHat pcs-0:0.10.12-6.el8_6.4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat pcs-0:0.11.4-7.el9_2 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.0 Extended Update Support RedHat pcs-0:0.11.1-10.el9_0.4 *
Red Hat Satellite 6.14 for RHEL 8 RedHat rubygem-rack-0:2.2.7-1.el8sat *
Red Hat Satellite 6.14 for RHEL 8 RedHat rubygem-rack-0:2.2.7-1.el8sat *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu bionic *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu esm-infra-legacy/trusty *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu focal *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu jammy *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu kinetic *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu lunar *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu mantic *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu trusty *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu upstream *
Ruby-rack Ubuntu xenial *

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