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

GHSA-9M98-W4QJ-8F6Q

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-25 21:31 – Updated: 2026-08-25 21:31
VLAI
Details

An algorithmic complexity flaw exists in libsoup's HTTP Range header processing that persists after the CVE-2025-32907 fix.

CVE-2025-32907 addressed memory amplification when a client repeated the same range many times in a single Range header. Commit 9bb92f7a corrected merge correctness in soup_message_headers_get_ranges_internal() in libsoup/soup-message-headers.c, but the coalescing loop still removes merged ranges using g_array_remove_index() for each coalesced element. Because GArray is contiguous, each mid-array removal performs an O(N) memmove. When many identical satisfiable ranges are supplied (for example bytes=0-0 repeated thousands of times), the loop performs O(N²) work coalescing them into a single range.

The vulnerable path is reachable server-side from handle_partial_get() in libsoup/server/http1/soup-server-message-io-http1.c when a SoupServer handler returns HTTP 200 with a non-empty body. No authentication is required. The number of ranges is bounded only by the maximum request header size (~100 KiB), allowing roughly 25,000 ranges per request. Reporter measurements on libsoup HEAD containing the CVE-2025-32907 fix show ~90 ms single-core CPU per such request at the wire maximum, blocking the server's event loop for that duration.

This is a CPU exhaustion / availability issue only. No memory corruption or information disclosure occurs.

Affected: libsoup versions containing the CVE-2025-32907 fix but not merge request !550. Fixed upstream: MR !550 merged 2026-08-20, replacing per-element removal with O(N) in-place compaction and rejecting Range headers requesting more than 200 ranges. Upstream report: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/538 Related: CVE-2025-32907

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-77680"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-407"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-25T21:17:46Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "An algorithmic complexity flaw exists in libsoup\u0027s HTTP Range header processing that persists after the CVE-2025-32907 fix.\n\nCVE-2025-32907 addressed memory amplification when a client repeated the same range many times in a single Range header. Commit 9bb92f7a corrected merge correctness in soup_message_headers_get_ranges_internal() in libsoup/soup-message-headers.c, but the coalescing loop still removes merged ranges using g_array_remove_index() for each coalesced element. Because GArray is contiguous, each mid-array removal performs an O(N) memmove. When many identical satisfiable ranges are supplied (for example bytes=0-0 repeated thousands of times), the loop performs O(N\u00b2) work coalescing them into a single range.\n\nThe vulnerable path is reachable server-side from handle_partial_get() in libsoup/server/http1/soup-server-message-io-http1.c when a SoupServer handler returns HTTP 200 with a non-empty body. No authentication is required. The number of ranges is bounded only by the maximum request header size (~100 KiB), allowing roughly 25,000 ranges per request. Reporter measurements on libsoup HEAD containing the CVE-2025-32907 fix show ~90 ms single-core CPU per such request at the wire maximum, blocking the server\u0027s event loop for that duration.\n\nThis is a CPU exhaustion / availability issue only. No memory corruption or information disclosure occurs.\n\nAffected: libsoup versions containing the CVE-2025-32907 fix but not merge request !550.\nFixed upstream: MR !550 merged 2026-08-20, replacing per-element removal with O(N) in-place compaction and rejecting Range headers requesting more than 200 ranges.\nUpstream report: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/538\nRelated: CVE-2025-32907",
  "id": "GHSA-9m98-w4qj-8f6q",
  "modified": "2026-08-25T21:31:32Z",
  "published": "2026-08-25T21:31:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-77680"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-32907"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-77680"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2520892"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/538"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/merge_requests/550"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



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…