Описание
An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.5 and 5.2 before 5.2.14.
ASGI requests with a missing or understated Content-Length header can bypass the FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE limit, potentially loading large files into memory and causing service degradation.
As a reminder, Django expects a limit to be configured at the web server level rather than solely relying on FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE.
Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected.
Django would like to thank Kyle Agronick for reporting this issue.
A flaw was found in Django. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to bypass the FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE limit by sending specially crafted ASGI (Asynchronous Server Gateway Interface) requests with a missing or understated Content-Length header. This can lead to large files being loaded into memory, potentially causing service degradation or a Denial of Service (DoS) condition.
Отчет
This Moderate flaw in Django can lead to service degradation or a denial of service. A remote attacker can exploit this by sending ASGI requests with a manipulated Content-Length header, bypassing the FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE and causing large files to be loaded into memory. Red Hat advises implementing content length restrictions at the web server layer, as Django's internal limits are not solely relied upon for protection.
Меры по смягчению последствий
To mitigate this issue, configure the web server (e.g., Nginx, Apache) hosting the Django application to enforce strict Content-Length limits for incoming ASGI requests. This ensures that large files cannot be loaded into memory by bypassing Django's internal FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE setting. Consult your web server's documentation for specific configuration instructions on limiting request body size. A service reload or restart may be required for the changes to take effect, which could temporarily impact service availability.
Затронутые пакеты
| Платформа | Пакет | Состояние | Рекомендация | Релиз |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-24/lightspeed-rhel8 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-25/lightspeed-rhel8 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-26/controller-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-26/eda-controller-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-26/gateway-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-26/hub-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-26/lightspeed-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-27/aap-cloud-billing-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-27/controller-rhel9 | Fix deferred | ||
| Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 | ansible-automation-platform-27/eda-controller-rhel9 | Fix deferred |
Показывать по
Дополнительная информация
Статус:
EPSS
5.3 Medium
CVSS3
Связанные уязвимости
An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.5 and 5.2 before 5.2.14. ASGI requests with a missing or understated `Content-Length` header can bypass the `FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` limit, potentially loading large files into memory and causing service degradation. As a reminder, Django expects a limit to be configured at the web server level rather than solely relying on `FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE`. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Kyle Agronick for reporting this issue.
An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.5 and 5.2 before 5.2.14. ASGI requests with a missing or understated `Content-Length` header can bypass the `FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` limit, potentially loading large files into memory and causing service degradation. As a reminder, Django expects a limit to be configured at the web server level rather than solely relying on `FILE_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE`. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Kyle Agronick for reporting this issue.
An issue was discovered in 6.0 before 6.0.5 and 5.2 before 5.2.14. ASG ...
Django has an Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency
Уязвимость программной платформы для веб-приложений Django, связанная с неправильной обработкой несоответствия параметра длины, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании
EPSS
5.3 Medium
CVSS3