GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-7P3P-8QV8-M2VH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-22 22:56 – Updated: 2026-07-22 22:56
VLAI
Summary
Eclipse Jetty: HTTP Authority/Host mismatch
Details

Summary

Jetty currently accepts HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 requests where the regular Host header and the pseudo-header :authority do not match. As a result, the same request can carry two different host identities through Jetty:

  • logic based on HttpURI / Request.getServerName(request) uses :authority
  • logic based on raw request headers continues to use Host

This creates a host/authority confusion condition that can break security assumptions in higher layers.

Jetty already performs an explicit authority/Host consistency check on the HTTP/1.1 path, but equivalent validation is missing on the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 paths.

Security Impact

This issue is not inherently remote code execution, but it can become security-relevant in deployments that rely on the request host for security-sensitive decisions, including:

  • host-based access control
  • virtual host isolation
  • multi-tenant routing by hostname
  • login/logout/callback URL construction
  • reverse proxy and forwarded-header trust chains
  • auditing, cache keys, and absolute URL generation

Potential consequences include:

  • bypass of host-based ACLs
  • virtual host or tenant isolation failures
  • incorrect or attacker-influenced redirect/callback targets
  • inconsistent proxy/downstream interpretation of the original target host
  • misleading logs and audit records

Technical Root Cause

  1. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 metadata builder paths:

  2. :authority is parsed separately into authority/URI state

  3. Host is preserved as a normal request header
  4. the two values are not compared for consistency

  5. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 server entry paths:

  6. Jetty calls ComplianceUtils.verify(httpCompliance, requestMetaData, listener)

  7. this verification does not enforce MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY

  8. On the HTTP/1.1 path:

  9. Jetty explicitly checks whether authority and Host match

  10. mismatches are rejected by default

Relevant Code Locations

HTTP/2 metadata builder:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-hpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/hpack/internal/MetaDataBuilder.java

HTTP/3 metadata builder:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-qpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/qpack/internal/metadata/MetaDataBuilder.java

HTTP/2 server entry:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP2.java

HTTP/3 server entry:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP3.java

Shared HTTP compliance verification:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/ComplianceUtils.java

HTTP/1.1 authority/Host consistency check:

  • jetty-core/jetty-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/server/internal/HttpConnection.java

Defined but not enforced on H2/H3:

  • jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/HttpCompliance.java
  • violation: MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY

Reproduction

I reproduced this on local Jetty 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT source.

Minimal reproduction steps:

  1. Start a Jetty HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 test server.
  2. Send a request with:
    • :authority = localhost:
    • Host = evil.example:
  3. In the request handler, inspect both:
    • Request.getServerName(request)
    • request.getHeaders().get(HttpHeader.HOST)
  4. Observe whether Jetty rejects the request or allows both values to remain visible. Observed result:
    • HTTP/2: request is accepted and returns 200
    • HTTP/3: request is accepted and returns 200
    • the server can observe both:
      • serverName=localhost
      • hostHeader=evil.example:

This shows that a single attacker-controlled request can preserve two conflicting host interpretations inside Jetty.

Tests Used

HTTP/2 rejection test:

  • org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority

HTTP/2 exploitability test:

  • org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader

HTTP/3 rejection test:

  • org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority

HTTP/3 exploitability test:

  • org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader

Observed behavior:

  • both rejection tests fail because Jetty returns 200 instead of 400
  • both exploitability tests pass, confirming that Jetty exposes different host values to different layers

Project-Internal Evidence of Real Impact

Examples:

  • jetty-openid uses Request.getServerName(request) to construct redirect URLs
  • jetty-ee11-proxy uses the raw Host header when building Forwarded

This indicates that the issue is not merely theoretical: Jetty’s own ecosystem already contains code paths where different host sources are used for different purposes.

Affected Version

Confirmed affected version:

  • 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT

Other versions may also be affected if they share the same HTTP/2 / HTTP/3 request construction and compliance-validation logic. I have not yet completed a historical version matrix and would recommend confirming exact affected ranges from Jetty’s branch history.

Suggested Fix

Recommend adding HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 validation equivalent to the existing HTTP/1.1 authority/Host consistency check:

  • if both :authority and regular Host are present
    • normalize and compare them
    • if they do not match, reject the request with 400 Bad Request
    • route the failure through the existing MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY compliance mechanism

Also adding explicit HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 regression coverage for this case.

Disclosure Status

  • not publicly disclosed
  • no public issue filed
  • shared only privately with the Jetty security contacts
Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "9.4.0.v20161208"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "9.4.58.v20250814"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "10.0.0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "10.0.26"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "11.0.0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "11.0.26"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 12.0.34"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "12.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "12.0.35"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 12.1.8"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "12.1.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "12.1.9"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-6790"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-20"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-22T22:56:43Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-07-14T09:16:41Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "#### Summary\n\nJetty currently accepts HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 requests where the regular\nHost header and the pseudo-header :authority\ndo not match. As a result, the same request can carry two different host identities\nthrough Jetty:\n\n- logic based on `HttpURI` / `Request.getServerName(request)` uses `:authority`\n- logic based on raw request headers continues to use `Host`\n\nThis creates a host/authority confusion condition that can break\nsecurity assumptions in higher layers.\n\nJetty already performs an explicit authority/Host consistency check on\nthe HTTP/1.1 path, but equivalent validation is missing on the HTTP/2\nand HTTP/3 paths.\n\n#### Security Impact\n\nThis issue is not inherently remote code execution, but it can become\nsecurity-relevant in deployments that rely on the request host for\nsecurity-sensitive decisions, including:\n\n- host-based access control\n- virtual host isolation\n- multi-tenant routing by hostname\n- login/logout/callback URL construction\n- reverse proxy and forwarded-header trust chains\n- auditing, cache keys, and absolute URL generation\n\nPotential consequences include:\n\n- bypass of host-based ACLs\n- virtual host or tenant isolation failures\n- incorrect or attacker-influenced redirect/callback targets\n- inconsistent proxy/downstream interpretation of the original target host\n- misleading logs and audit records\n\n#### Technical Root Cause\n\n1. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 metadata builder paths:\n\n- `:authority` is parsed separately into authority/URI state\n- `Host` is preserved as a normal request header\n- the two values are not compared for consistency\n\n2. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 server entry paths:\n\n- Jetty calls `ComplianceUtils.verify(httpCompliance, requestMetaData, listener)`\n- this verification does not enforce `MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY`\n\n3. On the HTTP/1.1 path:\n\n- Jetty explicitly checks whether authority and `Host` match\n- mismatches are rejected by default\n\n#### Relevant Code Locations\n\nHTTP/2 metadata builder:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-hpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/hpack/internal/MetaDataBuilder.java`\n\nHTTP/3 metadata builder:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-qpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/qpack/internal/metadata/MetaDataBuilder.java`\n\nHTTP/2 server entry:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP2.java`\n\nHTTP/3 server entry:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP3.java`\n\nShared HTTP compliance verification:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/ComplianceUtils.java`\n\nHTTP/1.1 authority/Host consistency check:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/server/internal/HttpConnection.java`\n\nDefined but not enforced on H2/H3:\n\n- `jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/HttpCompliance.java`\n- violation: MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY\n\n#### Reproduction\n\nI reproduced this on local Jetty 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT source.\n\nMinimal reproduction steps:\n\n1. Start a Jetty HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 test server.\n2. Send a request with:\n    - :authority = localhost:\u003cport\u003e\n    - Host = evil.example:\u003cport\u003e\n3. In the request handler, inspect both:\n    - Request.getServerName(request)\n    - request.getHeaders().get(HttpHeader.HOST)\n4. Observe whether Jetty rejects the request or allows both values to remain visible.\nObserved result:\n    - HTTP/2: request is accepted and returns 200\n    - HTTP/3: request is accepted and returns 200\n    - the server can observe both:\n        - serverName=localhost\n        - hostHeader=evil.example:\u003cport\u003e\n\nThis shows that a single attacker-controlled request can preserve two conflicting host interpretations inside Jetty.\n\n#### Tests Used\n\n\nHTTP/2 rejection test:\n\n- `org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority`\n\nHTTP/2 exploitability test:\n\n- `org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader`\n\nHTTP/3 rejection test:\n\n- `org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority`\n\nHTTP/3 exploitability test:\n\n- `org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader`\n\n\nObserved behavior:\n\n- both rejection tests fail because Jetty returns 200 instead of 400\n- both exploitability tests pass, confirming that Jetty exposes different host values to different layers\n\n#### Project-Internal Evidence of Real Impact\n\nExamples:\n\n- `jetty-openid` uses `Request.getServerName(request)` to construct redirect URLs\n- `jetty-ee11-proxy` uses the raw `Host` header when building `Forwarded`\n\nThis indicates that the issue is not merely theoretical: Jetty\u2019s own\necosystem already contains code paths where different host sources are\nused for different purposes.\n\n#### Affected Version\n\nConfirmed affected version:\n\n- 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT\n\nOther versions may also be affected if they share the same HTTP/2 /\nHTTP/3 request construction and compliance-validation logic. I have\nnot yet completed a historical version matrix and would recommend\nconfirming exact affected ranges from Jetty\u2019s branch history.\n\n\n#### Suggested Fix\n\nRecommend adding HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 validation equivalent to the\nexisting HTTP/1.1 authority/Host consistency check:\n\n- if both :authority and regular Host are present\n    - normalize and compare them\n    - if they do not match, reject the request with 400 Bad Request\n    - route the failure through the existing MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY compliance mechanism\n\nAlso adding explicit HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 regression coverage for this case.\n\n#### Disclosure Status\n\n- not publicly disclosed\n- no public issue filed\n- shared only privately with the Jetty security contacts",
  "id": "GHSA-7p3p-8qv8-m2vh",
  "modified": "2026-07-22T22:56:43Z",
  "published": "2026-07-22T22:56:43Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/security/advisories/GHSA-7p3p-8qv8-m2vh"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-6790"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/issues/14870"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/pull/14871"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/pull/14897"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/pull/14970"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/commit/3e5a4daec196859b8886b6f67b1157dab47cdb6f"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/commit/67ba9e6b39661810123680d9c894e99a7940c73d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/commit/cbca3076f7c914a232e7a8b22fa95fbf7e67a6cc"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/releases/tag/jetty-12.0.35"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jetty/jetty.project/releases/tag/jetty-12.1.9"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://gitlab.eclipse.org/security/cve-assignment/-/work_items/99"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Eclipse Jetty: HTTP Authority/Host mismatch"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

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…