Netty's HTTP/3 codec (io.netty:netty-codec-http3) versions 4.2.2.Final through 4.2.17.Final…
CVE-2026-100664 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in netty, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 4.2.18.Final as the first without the flaw, so updating netty to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.33% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update netty to 4.2.18.Final or a later version.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Netty | netty | 4.2.2.Final up to, but not including, 4.2.18.Final | 4.2.18.Final |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 8.7 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.5 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
Official description
Netty's HTTP/3 codec (io.netty:netty-codec-http3) versions 4.2.2.Final through 4.2.17.Final builds the HTTP/3 :authority pseudo-header from the HTTP/1 Host header before considering the authority of an absolute-form HTTP/1 request-target. In HttpConversionUtil.toHttp3Headers(HttpMessage, boolean) — reached via Http3FrameToHttpObjectCodec(false) — a non-empty Host header takes precedence over the request-target authority, contrary to the HTTP/1.1 rule that a server receiving an absolute-form request-target must ignore the Host header. In a Netty-based HTTP/1-to-HTTP/3 gateway, proxy, or protocol bridge, a remote client can send a request such as "GET https://trusted.example/admin HTTP/1.1" with "Host: attacker.example", causing components that validate, authorize, or route on the RFC-defined request-target authority to reach a different decision than the upstream HTTP/3 peer, which receives :authority derived from the conflicting Host header. This authority confusion can affect virtual-host routing, allow-list checks, backend selection, cache keys, and URL generation. The advisory reports integrity impact only (no code execution, memory corruption, or availability impact). Fixed in 4.2.18.Final.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Other vulnerabilities in netty
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.