CVE-2026-44894 — Netty's Default QUIC token handler accepts any client-supplied token
Netty is a network application framework for development of protocol servers and clients. NoQuicTokenHandler is the tokenHandler used when the application does not set one. Prior to version 4.2.15.Final, its writeToken() returns false (server will not send Retry — acceptable), but validateToken() unconditionally `return 0`. In QuicheQuicServerCodec.handlePacket(), a non-negative return from validateToken() is interpreted as 'token is valid, ODCID starts at offset 0', causing the server to call quiche_accept as if the client's address had been validated by a Retry round-trip. Per RFC 9000 §8.1, a validated address lifts the 3× anti-amplification send limit. Thus any attacker who includes ANY non-empty token bytes in an Initial packet — with a spoofed victim source IP — causes the Netty server to treat the victim as validated and reflect full-size handshake flights (certificates, etc.) toward it without the 3× cap. The correct 'no token handler' semantics would be to return -1 (invalid) so the normal un-validated path and amplification limit apply. Version 4.2.15.Final patches the issue.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
- Technical severity (high)+6
- 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.
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.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.
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.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Netty Netty).
- The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
- No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.5 | CVSS 3.1 | High | 3.9 | 3.6 | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.5 | CVSS 3.1 | High | 3.9 | 3.6 | 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.5 | CVSS 3.1 | High | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
EPSS over time FIRST
Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.19%
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).
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · netty/netty
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 7.5
- Source status changed · → Modified
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
5 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Medium CVE-2026-89044 HTTP Request Smuggling in Netty Sep 10, 2026
- Low CVE-2026-76816 Netty: MQTT Topic Name and Client ID Validation Bypass Aug 24, 2026
- High CVE-2026-62243 Netty 4.2.0 through 4.2.16 TLS Hostname Verification Bypass Aug 22, 2026
- High CVE-2026-62380 Netty before 4.2.16.Final SOCKS Proxy Null Byte Injection Aug 22, 2026
- Critical CVE-2026-75595 Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions in Netty Aug 19, 2026
- High CVE-2026-75596 Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to… Aug 19, 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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
- 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-2026-44894 is "Netty's Default QUIC token handler accepts any client-supplied token", rated High. It affects Netty (Netty); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.19% 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.