Search
Search Results (23 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-9517 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 28 Http Server, Traffic Server, Mac Os X and 25 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.5 High |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to unconstrained interal data buffering, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens the HTTP/2 window so the peer can send without constraint; however, they leave the TCP window closed so the peer cannot actually write (many of) the bytes on the wire. The attacker then sends a stream of requests for a large response object. Depending on how the servers queue the responses, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. | ||||
| CVE-2019-9511 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 29 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 26 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.5 High |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to window size manipulation and stream prioritization manipulation, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker requests a large amount of data from a specified resource over multiple streams. They manipulate window size and stream priority to force the server to queue the data in 1-byte chunks. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. | ||||
| CVE-2019-9515 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 36 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 33 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.5 High |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. | ||||