[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-4776?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17825555#comment-17825555
]
Trayan Simeonov commented on ZOOKEEPER-4776:
--------------------------------------------
Is this going to be prioritized any time soon. It is an opened vulnerability
which is being opened for 4 months now.
It will be nice to have some update on this one. Thanks!
> CVE-2023-36478 | org.eclipse.jetty_jetty-io
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-4776
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-4776
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.9.1
> Reporter: Aayush Suri
> Priority: Major
>
> {*}Vulnerability summary{*}: Eclipse Jetty provides a web server and servlet
> container. In versions 11.0.0 through 11.0.15, 10.0.0 through 10.0.15, and
> 9.0.0 through 9.4.52, an integer overflow in `MetaDataBuilder.checkSize`
> allows for HTTP/2 HPACK header values to exceed their size limit.
> `MetaDataBuilder.java` determines if a header name or value exceeds the size
> limit, and throws an exception if the limit is exceeded. However, when length
> is very large and huffman is true, the multiplication by 4 in line 295 will
> overflow, and length will become negative. `(_size+length)` will now be
> negative, and the check on line 296 will not be triggered. Furthermore,
> `MetaDataBuilder.checkSize` allows for user-entered HPACK header value sizes
> to be negative, potentially leading to a very large buffer allocation later
> on when the user-entered size is multiplied by 2. This means that if a user
> provides a negative length value (or, more precisely, a length value which,
> when multiplied by the 4/3 fudge factor, is negative), and this length value
> is a very large positive number when multiplied by 2, then the user can cause
> a very large buffer to be allocated on the server. Users of HTTP/2 can be
> impacted by a remote denial of service attack. The issue has been fixed in
> versions 11.0.16, 10.0.16, and 9.4.53. There are no known workarounds.
> Looking for a version the fixes this vulnerability.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
