| Package | Affected versions | Patched versions |
|---|---|---|
| traffic server | ≥ 6.0.0, ≤ 6.2.3≥ 7.0.0, ≤ 7.1.6≥ 8.0.0, ≤ 8.0.3 | |
| swiftnio | ≥ 1.0.0, ≤ 1.4.0 | |
| big-ip local traffic manager | ≥ 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.1≥ 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.1≥ 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.2≥ 14.0.0, < 14.0.1.1≥ 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.1≥ 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.1 | 11.6.5.112.1.5.113.1.3.214.0.1.114.1.2.115.0.1.1 |
| web gateway | ≥ 7.7.2.0, < 7.7.2.24≥ 7.8.2.0, < 7.8.2.13≥ 8.1.0, < 8.2.0 | 7.7.2.247.8.2.138.2.0 |
| node.js | ≥ 10.0.0, ≤ 10.12.0≥ 10.13.0, < 10.16.3≥ 12.0.0, < 12.8.1≥ 8.0.0, ≤ 8.8.1≥ 8.9.0, < 8.16.1 | 10.16.312.8.18.16.1 |
| graalvm | = 19.2.0 | |
| jboss core services | = 1.0 | |
| jboss enterprise application platform | = 7.2.0= 7.3.0 | |
| openshift container platform | = 4.1 | |
| openshift service mesh | = 1.0 | |
| openstack | = 14 | |
| quay | = 3.0.0 | |
| single sign-on | = 7.3 | |
| software collections | = 1.0 |
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.
Running one of these products? Scan your site to see whether it exposes a vulnerable version.
Scan my site free