Overview 6 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC
6matches
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
Outside Waratek scope
5
83.3%
Not applicable
1
16.7%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
6
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
6
100.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 5 / month
Aug 19Sep 19Oct 19Nov 19Dec 19Jan 20Feb 20Mar 20Apr 20
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2020-11100 | High | 2020-04-02 | Not applicable | Forecast only | In hpack_dht_insert in hpack-tbl.c in the HPACK decoder in HAProxy 1.8 through 2.x before 2.1.4, a remote attacker can write arbitrary bytes around a certain location on the heap via a crafted HTTP/2 request, possibly causing remote code execution. |
| CVE-2019-9516 | Medium | 2019-08-13 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of headers with a 0-length header name and 0-length header value, optionally Huffman encoded into 1-byte or greater headers. Some implementations allocate memory for these headers and keep the allocation alive until the session dies. This can consume excess memory. |
| CVE-2019-9515 | High | 2019-08-13 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. |
| CVE-2019-9514 | High | 2019-08-13 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a reset flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens a number of streams and sends an invalid request over each stream that should solicit a stream of RST_STREAM frames from the peer. Depending on how the peer queues the RST_STREAM frames, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. |
| CVE-2019-9513 | High | 2019-08-13 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker creates multiple request streams and continually shuffles the priority of the streams in a way that causes substantial churn to the priority tree. This can consume excess CPU. |
| CVE-2019-9511 | High | 2019-08-13 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to window size manipulation and stream prioritization manipulation, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker requests a large amount of data from a specified resource over multiple streams. They manipulate window size and stream priority to force the server to queue the data in 1-byte chunks. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. |