[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[SECURITY] [DSA 4968-1] haproxy security update



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian Security Advisory DSA-4968-1                   security@debian.org
https://www.debian.org/security/                     Salvatore Bonaccorso
September 07, 2021                    https://www.debian.org/security/faq
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Package        : haproxy
CVE ID         : CVE-2021-40346

Ori Hollander reported that missing header name length checks in the
htx_add_header() and htx_add_trailer() functions in HAProxy, a fast and
reliable load balancing reverse proxy, could result in request smuggling
attacks or response splitting attacks.

Additionally this update addresses #993303 introduced in DSA 4960-1
causing HAProxy to fail serving URLs with HTTP/2 containing '//'.

For the stable distribution (bullseye), this problem has been fixed in
version 2.2.9-2+deb11u2.

We recommend that you upgrade your haproxy packages.

For the detailed security status of haproxy please refer to its security
tracker page at:
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/haproxy

Further information about Debian Security Advisories, how to apply
these updates to your system and frequently asked questions can be
found at: https://www.debian.org/security/

Mailing list: debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=8IRe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: