CVE Intelligence
Medium Injection

CVE-2021-21295 — Possible request smuggling in HTTP/2 due missing validation

Netty is an open-source, asynchronous event-driven network application framework for rapid development of maintainable high performance protocol servers & clients. In Netty (io.netty:netty-codec-http2) before version 4.1.60.Final there is a vulnerability that enables request smuggling. If a Content-Length header is present in the original HTTP/2 request, the field is not validated by `Http2MultiplexHandler` as it is propagated up. This is fine as long as the request is not proxied through as HTTP/1.1. If the request comes in as an HTTP/2 stream, gets converted into the HTTP/1.1 domain objects (`HttpRequest`, `HttpContent`, etc.) via `Http2StreamFrameToHttpObjectCodec `and then sent up to the child channel's pipeline and proxied through a remote peer as HTTP/1.1 this may result in request smuggling. In a proxy case, users may assume the content-length is validated somehow, which is not the case. If the request is forwarded to a backend channel that is a HTTP/1.1 connection, the Content-Length now has meaning and needs to be checked. An attacker can smuggle requests inside the body as it gets downgraded from HTTP/2 to HTTP/1.1. For an example attack refer to the linked GitHub Advisory. Users are only affected if all of this is true: `HTTP2MultiplexCodec` or `Http2FrameCodec` is used, `Http2StreamFrameToHttpObjectCodec` is used to convert to HTTP/1.1 objects, and these HTTP/1.1 objects are forwarded to another remote peer. This has been patched in 4.1.60.Final As a workaround, the user can do the validation by themselves by implementing a custom `ChannelInboundHandler` that is put in the `ChannelPipeline` behind `Http2StreamFrameToHttpObjectCodec`.

Published Mar 9, 2021 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 18.9% (30-day exploitation probability)+15
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
18.89%
ahead of 97% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Apache Software Foundation
Kudu and 8 more
CVSS base
5.9
Medium · 3 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
Yes
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — www.oracle.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Apache Software Foundation Kudu, Apache Software Foundation Zookeeper, Debian Debian Linux…).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  4. EPSS ahead of 97% of scored CVEs: prioritize it in the patch queue.
  5. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (injection), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Apache Software Foundation Kudu < 1.16.0 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Apache Software Foundation Zookeeper version 3.5.9 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Debian Debian Linux version 10.0 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Oncommand Api Services versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netapp Oncommand Workflow Automation versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Netty Io.netty:netty-codec-http2 version < 4.1.60.Final Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Netty Netty < 4.1.60 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Oracle Communications Cloud Native Core Policy version 1.14.0 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Quarkus Quarkus ≤ 1.13.7 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.9 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.2 3.6 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.9 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.2 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.9 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
2.6 CVSS 2.0 Low 4.9 2.9 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-444 · HTTP Request Smuggling

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 18.89%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Look for parameters with command/query metacharacters and unexpected child processes of the service.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsendpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · netty/io.netty:netty-codec-http2
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 5.9
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • 2021
  • CVE published
    Mar 9, 2021 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

91 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Apache Software Foundation
every CVE for this vendor
Injection
same class
CWE-444
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-84501 An unauthenticated attacker can inject arbitrary fake log lines into Apache ZooKeeper's… 29d
  • CVE-2026-84439 When audit logging is enabled (zookeeper.audit.enable=true), an unauthenticated attacker… 29d
  • CVE-2026-79993 Missing Authorization in Apache Software Foundation Zookeeper 29d
  • CVE-2026-59969 Apache ZooKeeper quorum TLS fails to enforce peer hostname verification in FIPS-mode… 29d
  • CVE-2026-59739 Missing Authorization in Apache Software Foundation Zookeeper 29d
  • CVE-2026-89044 HTTP Request Smuggling in Netty Sep 10, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2021-21295 is "Possible request smuggling in HTTP/2 due missing validation", rated Medium. It affects Kudu (Apache Software Foundation); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.9 describes technical severity. EPSS 18.89% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.