FKIE_CVE-2026-100664
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-09-26 14:16 - Updated: 2026-09-28 17:17
Severity
Summary
Netty's HTTP/3 codec (io.netty:netty-codec-http3) versions 4.2.2.Final through 4.2.17.Final builds the HTTP/3 :authority pseudo-header from the HTTP/1 Host header before considering the authority of an absolute-form HTTP/1 request-target. In HttpConversionUtil.toHttp3Headers(HttpMessage, boolean) — reached via Http3FrameToHttpObjectCodec(false) — a non-empty Host header takes precedence over the request-target authority, contrary to the HTTP/1.1 rule that a server receiving an absolute-form request-target must ignore the Host header. In a Netty-based HTTP/1-to-HTTP/3 gateway, proxy, or protocol bridge, a remote client can send a request such as "GET https://trusted.example/admin HTTP/1.1" with "Host: attacker.example", causing components that validate, authorize, or route on the RFC-defined request-target authority to reach a different decision than the upstream HTTP/3 peer, which receives :authority derived from the conflicting Host header. This authority confusion can affect virtual-host routing, allow-list checks, backend selection, cache keys, and URL generation. The advisory reports integrity impact only (no code execution, memory corruption, or availability impact). Fixed in 4.2.18.Final.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"packageURL": "pkg:maven/io.netty/netty-codec-http3",
"product": "netty",
"vendor": "netty",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.2.18.Final",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.2.2.Final",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "4.2.18.Final",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Netty\u0027s HTTP/3 codec (io.netty:netty-codec-http3) versions 4.2.2.Final through 4.2.17.Final builds the HTTP/3 :authority pseudo-header from the HTTP/1 Host header before considering the authority of an absolute-form HTTP/1 request-target. In HttpConversionUtil.toHttp3Headers(HttpMessage, boolean) \u2014 reached via Http3FrameToHttpObjectCodec(false) \u2014 a non-empty Host header takes precedence over the request-target authority, contrary to the HTTP/1.1 rule that a server receiving an absolute-form request-target must ignore the Host header. In a Netty-based HTTP/1-to-HTTP/3 gateway, proxy, or protocol bridge, a remote client can send a request such as \"GET https://trusted.example/admin HTTP/1.1\" with \"Host: attacker.example\", causing components that validate, authorize, or route on the RFC-defined request-target authority to reach a different decision than the upstream HTTP/3 peer, which receives :authority derived from the conflicting Host header. This authority confusion can affect virtual-host routing, allow-list checks, backend selection, cache keys, and URL generation. The advisory reports integrity impact only (no code execution, memory corruption, or availability impact). Fixed in 4.2.18.Final."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-100664",
"lastModified": "2026-09-28T17:17:44.387",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 3.6,
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
],
"cvssMetricV40": [
{
"cvssData": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"baseScore": 8.7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
],
"ssvcV203": [
{
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"ssvcData": {
"id": "CVE-2026-100664",
"options": [
{
"exploitation": "none"
},
{
"automatable": "yes"
},
{
"technicalImpact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-09-28T16:46:54.123062Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
}
}
]
},
"published": "2026-09-26T14:16:49.540",
"references": [
{
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"url": "https://github.com/netty/netty/security/advisories/GHSA-hfr2-x62w-v49h"
},
{
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/netty-4.2.2-through-4.2.15-http-1-host-header-authority-confusion"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"vulnStatus": "Deferred",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-20"
}
],
"source": "disclosure@vulncheck.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Loading…
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.
Loading…