CVE-2024-43783
17h16 +00:00
CVE 描述
Apollo Router Coprocessors may cause Denial-of-Service when handling request bodies
The Apollo Router Core is a configurable, high-performance graph router written in Rust to run a federated supergraph that uses Apollo Federation 2. Instances of the Apollo Router running versions >=1.21.0 and < 1.52.1 are impacted by a denial of service vulnerability if _all_ of the following are true: 1. The Apollo Router has been configured to support [External Coprocessing](https://www.apollographql.com/docs/router/customizations/coprocessor). 2. The Apollo Router has been configured to send request bodies to coprocessors. This is a non-default configuration and must be configured intentionally by administrators. Instances of the Apollo Router running versions >=1.7.0 and <1.52.1 are impacted by a denial-of-service vulnerability if all of the following are true: 1. Router has been configured to use a custom-developed Native Rust Plugin. 2. The plugin accesses Request.router_request in the RouterService layer. 3. You are accumulating the body from Request.router_request into memory. If using an impacted configuration, the Router will load entire HTTP request bodies into memory without respect to other HTTP request size-limiting configurations like limits.http_max_request_bytes. This can cause the Router to be out-of-memory (OOM) terminated if a sufficiently large request is sent to the Router. By default, the Router sets limits.http_max_request_bytes to 2 MB. If you have an impacted configuration as defined above, please upgrade to at least Apollo Router 1.52.1. If you cannot upgrade, you can mitigate the denial-of-service opportunity impacting External Coprocessors by setting the coprocessor.router.request.body configuration option to false. Please note that changing this configuration option will change the information sent to any coprocessors you have configured and may impact functionality implemented by those coprocessors. If you have developed a Native Rust Plugin and cannot upgrade, you can update your plugin to either not accumulate the request body or enforce a maximum body size limit. You can also mitigate this issue by limiting HTTP body payload sizes prior to the Router (e.g., in a proxy or web application firewall appliance).CVE 信息
相关弱点
| 弱点名称 | 来源 | |
|---|---|---|
| Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. |
指标
| 指标 | 评分 | 严重程度 | CVSS 向量 | 来源 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 7.5 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
更多信息
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. None The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope MetricsThe Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal MetricsThe Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. |
EPSS
EPSS 评分
EPSS 百分位
相关产品
配置 0
Apollographql>>Apollo-router >> Version 从（含） 1.7.0 至（不含） 1.52.1
Apollographql>>Apollo_helms-charts_router >> Version 从（含） 1.7.0 至（不含） 1.52.1
Apollographql>>Apollo_router >> Version 从（含） 1.7.0 至（不含） 1.52.1
参考资料
Tags : x_refsource_CONFIRM
Tags : x_refsource_MISC
Tags : x_refsource_MISC
