The public dashboard query endpoint does not limit request body size before processing, allowing unauthenticated attackers to trigger excessive memory allocation by sending arbitrarily large JSON payloads. This can lead to denial of service through memory exhaustion. No valid dashboard access token or authentication is required to exploit this vulnerability.
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grafana | Grafana | * | 11.6.14 (including) |
| Grafana | Grafana | 12.2.0 (including) | 12.2.8 (including) |
| Grafana | Grafana | 12.3.0 (including) | 12.3.6 (including) |
| Grafana | Grafana | 12.4.0 (including) | 12.4.3 (including) |
| Grafana | Grafana | 13.0.0 (including) | 13.0.1 (including) |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 | RedHat | grafana-0:10.2.6-28.el10_2.4 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10.0 Extended Update Support | RedHat | grafana-0:10.2.6-26.el10_0 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | RedHat | grafana-0:9.2.10-32.el8_10.1 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | RedHat | grafana-0:10.2.6-23.el9_8.1 | * |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.6 Extended Update Support | RedHat | grafana-0:10.2.6-23.el9_6 | * |
| Red Hat Hardened Images | RedHat | grafana13-1-main-13.1.1-0.2.hum1 | * |
| Red Hat Hardened Images | RedHat | grafana12-4-main-12.4.6-0.2.hum1 | * |
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.