| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Description
In Spring Framework, versions 6.0.x as of 6.0.5, versions 6.1.x and 6.2.x, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a “Content-Disposition” header with a non-ASCII charset, where the filename attribute is derived from user-supplied input.
Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all the following are true:
* The header is prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition.
* The filename is set via ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset).
* The value for the filename is derived from user-supplied input.
* The application does not sanitize the user-supplied input.
* The downloaded content of the response is injected with malicious commands by the attacker (see RFD paper reference for details).
An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true:
* The application does not set a “Content-Disposition” response header.
* The header is not prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition.
* The filename is set via one of: * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String), or
* ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, ASCII)
* The filename is not derived from user-supplied input.
* The filename is derived from user-supplied input but sanitized by the application.
* The attacker cannot inject malicious content in the downloaded content of the response.
Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework:
* 6.2.0 - 6.2.7
* 6.1.0 - 6.1.20
* 6.0.5 - 6.0.28
* Older, unsupported versions are not affected
MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version.
Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.8OSS6.1.x6.1.21OSS6.0.x6.0.29 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary.
CWE-113 in `Content-Disposition` handling in VMware Spring Framework versions 6.0.5 to 6.2.7 allows remote attackers to launch Reflected File Download (RFD) attacks via unsanitized user input in `ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset)` with non-ASCII charsets. |
| arduino-esp32 provides an Arduino core for the ESP32. Versions prior to 3.3.0-RC1 and 3.2.1 contain a HTTP Response Splitting vulnerability. The `sendHeader` function takes arbitrary input for the HTTP header name and value, concatenates them into an HTTP header line, and appends this to the outgoing HTTP response headers. There is no validation or sanitization of the `name` or `value` parameters before they are included in the HTTP response. If an attacker can control the input to `sendHeader` (either directly or indirectly), they could inject carriage return (`\r`) or line feed (`\n`) characters into either the header name or value. This could allow the attacker to inject additional headers, manipulate the structure of the HTTP response, potentially inject an entire new HTTP response (HTTP Response Splitting), and/or ause header confusion or other HTTP protocol attacks. Versions 3.3.0-RC1 and 3.2.1 contain a fix for the issue. |
| CGI::Simple versions before 1.282 for Perl has a HTTP response splitting flaw
This vulnerability is a confirmed HTTP response splitting flaw in CGI::Simple that allows HTTP response header injection, which can be used for reflected XSS or open redirect under certain conditions.
Although some validation exists, it can be bypassed using URL-encoded values, allowing an attacker to inject untrusted content into the response via query parameters.
As a result, an attacker can inject a line break (e.g. %0A) into the parameter value, causing the server to split the HTTP response and inject arbitrary headers or even an HTML/JavaScript body, leading to reflected cross-site scripting (XSS), open redirect or other attacks.
The issue documented in CVE-2010-4410 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2010-4410 is related but the fix was incomplete.
Impact
By injecting %0A (newline) into a query string parameter, an attacker can:
* Break the current HTTP header
* Inject a new header or entire body
* Deliver a script payload that is reflected in the server’s response
That can lead to the following attacks:
* reflected XSS
* open redirect
* cache poisoning
* header manipulation |
| ewe is a Gleam web server. Prior to version 3.0.6, the encode_headers function in src/ewe/internal/encoder.gleam directly interpolates response header keys and values into raw HTTP bytes without validating or stripping CRLF (\r\n) sequences. An application that passes user-controlled data into response headers (e.g., setting a Location redirect header from a request parameter) allows an attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP response content, leading to response splitting, cache poisoning, and possible cross-site scripting. Notably, ewe does validate CRLF in incoming request headers via validate_field_value() in the HTTP/1.1 parser — but provides no equivalent protection for outgoing response headers in the encoder. This issue has been patched in version 3.0.6. |
| Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. Prior to versions 38.8.6, 39.8.3, 40.8.3, and 41.0.3, apps that register custom protocol handlers via protocol.handle() / protocol.registerSchemesAsPrivileged() or modify response headers via webRequest.onHeadersReceived may be vulnerable to HTTP response header injection if attacker-controlled input is reflected into a response header name or value. An attacker who can influence a header value may be able to inject additional response headers, affecting cookies, content security policy, or cross-origin access controls. Apps that do not reflect external input into response headers are not affected. This issue has been patched in versions 38.8.6, 39.8.3, 40.8.3, and 41.0.3. |
| HCL Aftermarket DPC is affected by HTTP Response Splitting vulnerability where in depending on how the web application handles the split response, an attacker may be able to execute arbitrary commands or inject harmful content into the response.. |
| Pi-hole Admin Interface is a web interface for managing Pi-hole, a network-level advertisement and internet tracker blocking application. Pi-hole Admin Interface before 6.3 is vulnerable to Carriage Return Line Feed (CRLF) injection. When a request is made to a file ending with the .lp extension, the application performs a redirect without properly sanitizing the input. An attacker can inject carriage return and line feed characters (%0d%0a) to manipulate both the headers and the content of the HTTP response. This enables the injection of arbitrary HTTP response headers, potentially leading to session fixation, cache poisoning, and the weakening or bypassing of browser-based security mechanisms such as Content Security Policy or X-XSS-Protection. This vulnerability is fixed in 6.3. |
| Some mod_proxy configurations on Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.55 allow a HTTP Request Smuggling attack.
Configurations are affected when mod_proxy is enabled along with some form of RewriteRule
or ProxyPassMatch in which a non-specific pattern matches
some portion of the user-supplied request-target (URL) data and is then
re-inserted into the proxied request-target using variable
substitution. For example, something like:
RewriteEngine on
RewriteRule "^/here/(.*)" "http://example.com:8080/elsewhere?$1"; [P]
ProxyPassReverse /here/ http://example.com:8080/
Request splitting/smuggling could result in bypass of access controls in the proxy server, proxying unintended URLs to existing origin servers, and cache poisoning. Users are recommended to update to at least version 2.4.56 of Apache HTTP Server. |
| HTTP response splitting in the core of Apache HTTP Server allows an attacker who can manipulate the Content-Type response headers of applications hosted or proxied by the server can split the HTTP response.
This vulnerability was described as CVE-2023-38709 but the patch included in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.59 did not address the issue.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.64, which fixes this issue. |
| Faulty input validation in the core of Apache allows malicious or exploitable backend/content generators to split HTTP responses.
This issue affects Apache HTTP Server: through 2.4.58. |
| The cgi gem before 0.1.0.2, 0.2.x before 0.2.2, and 0.3.x before 0.3.5 for Ruby allows HTTP response splitting. This is relevant to applications that use untrusted user input either to generate an HTTP response or to create a CGI::Cookie object. |
| An issue was discovered in GFI Kerio Control 9.2.5 through 9.4.5. The dest GET parameter passed to the /nonauth/addCertException.cs and /nonauth/guestConfirm.cs and /nonauth/expiration.cs pages is not properly sanitized before being used to generate a Location HTTP header in a 302 HTTP response. This can be exploited to perform Open Redirect or HTTP Response Splitting attacks, which in turn lead to Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). Remote command execution can be achieved by leveraging the upgrade feature in the admin interface. |
| An Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('http response splitting') vulnerability [CWE-113] in Fortinet FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.6.0, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.4.5 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to bypass the file filter via crafted HTTP headers. |
| A vulnerability in the web-based management API of Cisco AsyncOS Software for Cisco Secure Email Gateway could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct an HTTP response splitting attack.
This vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation of some parameters that are passed to the web-based management API of the affected system. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of an affected interface to click a crafted link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to perform cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks, resulting in the execution of arbitrary script code in the browser of the targeted user, or could allow the attacker to access sensitive, browser-based information. |
| cpp-httplib version v0.17.3 through v0.18.3 fails to filter CRLF characters ("\r\n") when those are prefixed with a null byte. This enables attackers to exploit CRLF injection that could further lead to HTTP Response Splitting, XSS, and more. |
| In affected versions of Octopus Server it was possible for a user with sufficient access to set custom headers in all server responses. By submitting a specifically crafted referrer header the user could ensure that all subsequent server responses would return 500 errors rendering the site mostly unusable. The user would be able to subsequently set and unset the referrer header to control the denial of service state with a valid CSRF token whilst new CSRF tokens could not be generated. |
| HTTP Response splitting in multiple modules in Apache HTTP Server allows an attacker that can inject malicious response headers into backend applications to cause an HTTP desynchronization attack.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.4.59, which fixes this issue. |
| Mastodon is a free, open-source social network server based on ActivityPub. Starting in version 4.2.0-beta1 and prior to version 4.2.0-rc2, by crafting specific input, attackers can inject arbitrary data into HTTP requests issued by Mastodon. This can be used to perform confused deputy attacks if the server configuration includes `ALLOWED_PRIVATE_ADDRESSES` to allow access to local exploitable services. Version 4.2.0-rc2 has a patch for the issue. |
| The vulnerability allows a remote attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP response headers or manipulate HTTP response bodies inside a victim’s session via a crafted URL or HTTP request. |
| Trillium is a composable toolkit for building internet applications with async rust. In `trillium-http` prior to 0.3.12 and `trillium-client` prior to 0.5.4, insufficient validation of outbound header values may lead to request splitting or response splitting attacks in scenarios where attackers have sufficient control over headers. This only affects use cases where attackers have control of request headers, and can insert "\r\n" sequences. Specifically, if untrusted and unvalidated input is inserted into header names or values.
Outbound `trillium_http::HeaderValue` and `trillium_http::HeaderName` can be constructed infallibly and were not checked for illegal bytes when sending requests from the client or responses from the server. Thus, if an attacker has sufficient control over header values (or names) in a request or response that they could inject `\r\n` sequences, they could get the client and server out of sync, and then pivot to gain control over other parts of requests or responses. (i.e. exfiltrating data from other requests, SSRF, etc.)
In `trillium-http` versions 0.3.12 and later, if a header name is invalid in server response headers, the specific header and any associated values are omitted from network transmission. Additionally, if a header value is invalid in server response headers, the individual header value is omitted from network transmission. Other headers values with the same header name will still be sent. In `trillium-client` versions 0.5.4 and later, if any header name or header value is invalid in the client request headers, awaiting the client Conn returns an `Error::MalformedHeader` prior to any network access. As a workaround, Trillium services and client applications should sanitize or validate untrusted input that is included in header values and header names. Carriage return, newline, and null characters are not allowed. |
