[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 08:05:30 +0000 (UTC)
From: Sébastien Delafond <seb@...ian.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CVE request: Varnish 3 before 3.0.7 was vulnerable to HTTP
Smuggling issues: Double Content Length and bad EOL
On 2016-04-16, Régis Leroy wrote:
> Varnish 4.x serie is not impacted. Flaws Fixed in version 3.0.7 in march 2015.
>
> Changelog is:
> * Requests with multiple Content-Length headers will now fail.
> * Stop recognizing a single CR (r) as a HTTP line separator. This
> opened up a possible cache poisoning attack in stacked installations
> where sslterminator/varnish/backend had different CR handling.
>
> https://github.com/varnish/Varnish-Cache/commit/29870c8fe95e4e8a672f6f28c5fbe692bea09e9c
> https://github.com/varnish/Varnish-Cache/commit/85e8468bec9416bd7e16b0d80cb820ecd2b330c3
>
> Combinations of theses two flaws in HTTP protocol handling allows for
> "HTTP Response Splitting" attacks
> when another actor in front of Varnish3 can transmit headers in this
> form (for example):
>
> Dummy: header\rContent-Length: 0\r\n
>
> This is a one year old issue, on the old last release of this serie.
> But we still find some installations. A CVE would maybe help removal
> of 3.x installations, or at least upgrades to 3.0.7.
Hi Mitre,
the Debian Security team considers the issue serious enough to release
a DSA, so we'd also appreciate if this could be assigned a CVE.
Cheers,
--Seb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
