Vulnerabilidades do Red Hat Red Hat Data Grid 8

A flaw was found in Netty's `netty-codec-http` component. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted HTTP/1.1 chunk-size token that includes post-digit whitespace. This incorrect parsing of the chunk size can lead to HTTP request smuggling. This allows an attacker to bypass security controls or access unauthorized resources in proxy/backend deployments.

A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/1 decoder. Incomplete validation of malformed Transfer-Encoding headers allows a remote attacker to perform HTTP request smuggling. By sending specially crafted HTTP requests, an attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP requests, potentially bypassing security controls or accessing unauthorized resources.

A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/2 stack. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to inject prohibited characters, such as NUL, Line Feed, and Carriage Return, into HTTP/2 header field values due to insufficient validation. When these values cross an HTTP/2 to HTTP/1.1 translation boundary, they can be exploited for request smuggling, header injection, or response splitting. This could lead to unauthorized access, data manipulation, or other security bypasses.

A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/1.1 decoder. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to bypass `Transfer-Encoding` header validation by splitting the `Transfer-Encoding` field across multiple headers, with the last field containing a non-final transfer coding like `gzip` or `deflate`. This bypass can lead to HTTP request smuggling, enabling attackers to bypass security controls, desynchronize request processing, or cause requests to be processed in an unintended context.

A flaw was found in Netty. A remote attacker could exploit this by sending a specially crafted HTTP request that includes control characters within the chunk-size line. This bypasses the intended strict validation, allowing the attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP requests. This vulnerability can lead to HTTP request smuggling, potentially resulting in information disclosure or other unauthorized actions.

A flaw was found in EAP's Elytron. An EAP application whose security domain is backed by an Elytron token-realm with oauth2-introspection would allow parameter substitution due to missing URL encoding.

A flaw was found in the DERDecoder class within wildfly-elytron-asn1. A remote attacker can exploit this resource exhaustion vulnerability by sending a specially crafted DER (Distinguished Encoding Rules) payload. The decoder attempts to allocate excessive memory based on an inflated length value without proper validation, leading to Java Virtual Machine (JVM) memory exhaustion. This results in a remote Denial of Service (DoS) for services that process untrusted DER/ASN.1 input, including SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) authentication mechanisms and X.500 certificate principal parsing paths.

A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/2 HpackEncoder. A remote attacker can exploit this by sending HTTP/2 SETTINGS frames with a very large MAX_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE. This causes the HpackEncoder to store an excessive number of unique headers, leading to increased CPU usage and memory consumption, ultimately resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

A flaw was found in the ChunkReader component of the Undertow HTTP server, which is used by WildFly and JBoss EAP to handle chunked transfer encoding. The issue occurs because the parser uses a single internal variable to store both the remaining chunk size and state flags. By sending a specially crafted request with an extremely large chunk size, an attacker can cause these values to overlap, tricking the parser into thinking a request has finished prematurely. This can allow a second, "smuggled" request to be processed out of sync, potentially bypassing security controls.

Keycloak provides a mechanism called Client Policies to enforce security requirements on clients, such as requiring them to use signed JWTs for authentication. A flaw was discovered where this enforcement can be bypassed. An attacker with valid client credentials can provide a fake, unsigned assertion header that tricks the system into thinking the policy requirements have been met. This allows the attacker to authenticate using simpler methods like a client secret even when the administrator has mandated more secure, signed assertions.