← Back
CWE-113

106 CVEs • Abstraction: Variant

Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')

The product receives data from an HTTP agent/component (e.g., web server, proxy, browser, etc.), but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CR and LF characters before the data is included in outgoing HTTP headers.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (106)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
1Apache
1Flink Stateful Functions
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 19, 2023
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers in Apache Flink Stateful Functions 3.1.0, 3.1.1 and 3.2.0 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via...Show more
Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers in Apache Flink Stateful Functions 3.1.0, 3.1.1 and 3.2.0 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via crafted HTTP requests. Attackers could potentially inject malicious content into the HTTP response that is sent to the user's browser. Users should upgrade to Apache Flink Stateful Functions version 3.3.0.Show less
1Crowcpp
1Crow
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 12, 2023
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
All versions of the package crow are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting when untrusted user input is used to build header values. Header values are not properly sanitized against CRLF Injection in the set_header and a...Show more
All versions of the package crow are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting when untrusted user input is used to build header values. Header values are not properly sanitized against CRLF Injection in the set_header and add_header functions. An attacker can add the \r\n (carriage return line feeds) characters to end the HTTP response headers and inject malicious content.Show less
1Drogon
1Drogon
Jun 17, 2026
Jul 6, 2023
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
All versions of the package drogonframework/drogon are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting when untrusted user input is used to build header values in the addHeader and addCookie functions. An attacker can add the \r\n...Show more
All versions of the package drogonframework/drogon are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting when untrusted user input is used to build header values in the addHeader and addCookie functions. An attacker can add the \r\n (carriage return line feeds) characters to end the HTTP response headers and inject malicious content.Show less
1Ami
1Megarac Sp X
Jun 17, 2026
Jul 5, 2023
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
AMI SPx contains a vulnerability in the BMC where an Attacker may cause an improper neutralization of CRLF sequences in HTTP Headers. A successful exploit of this vulnerability may lead to a loss of integrity.
1Gitlab
1Gitlab
Jun 17, 2026
Jun 7, 2023
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An issue has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions starting from 15.4 before 15.10.8, all versions starting from 15.11 before 15.11.7, all versions starting from 16.0 before 16.0.2. Open redirection was...Show more
An issue has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions starting from 15.4 before 15.10.8, all versions starting from 15.11 before 15.11.7, all versions starting from 16.0 before 16.0.2. Open redirection was possible via HTTP response splitting in the NPM package API.Show less
1Splunk
2Splunk
Splunk Cloud Platform
Jun 17, 2026
Jun 1, 2023
N/A· v4
8.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 9.0.5, 8.2.11, and 8.1.14, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 9.0.2303.100, a low-privileged user can trigger an HTTP response splitting vulnerability with the ‘rest’ SPL command...Show more
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 9.0.5, 8.2.11, and 8.1.14, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 9.0.2303.100, a low-privileged user can trigger an HTTP response splitting vulnerability with the ‘rest’ SPL command that lets them potentially access other REST endpoints in the system arbitrarily.Show less
1Fortinet
2Fortios
Fortiproxy
Jun 17, 2026
Feb 16, 2023
N/A· v4
5.4 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A improper neutralization of crlf sequences in http headers ('http response splitting') in Fortinet FortiOS versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, 7.0.0 through 7.0.8, 6.4.0 through 6.4.11, 6.2.0 through 6.2.12, 6.0.0 through 6.0...Show more
A improper neutralization of crlf sequences in http headers ('http response splitting') in Fortinet FortiOS versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, 7.0.0 through 7.0.8, 6.4.0 through 6.4.11, 6.2.0 through 6.2.12, 6.0.0 through 6.0.16, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, 2.0.0 through 2.0.10, 1.2.0 through 1.2.13, 1.1.0 through 1.1.6 may allow an authenticated and remote attacker to perform an HTTP request splitting attack which gives attackers control of the remaining headers and body of the response.Show less
1Turbogears Project
1Turbogears
Jun 17, 2026
Feb 4, 2023
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
6.5 MEDIUM· v2
A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in OnShift TurboGears 1.0.11.10. This affects an unknown part of the file turbogears/controllers.py of the component HTTP Header Handler. The manipulation leads to ht...Show more
A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in OnShift TurboGears 1.0.11.10. This affects an unknown part of the file turbogears/controllers.py of the component HTTP Header Handler. The manipulation leads to http response splitting. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. Upgrading to version 1.0.11.11 is able to address this issue. The patch is named f68bbaba47f4474e1da553aa51564a73e1d92a84. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-220059.Show less
1Apache
1Http Server
Jun 17, 2026
Jan 17, 2023
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Prior to Apache HTTP Server 2.4.55, a malicious backend can cause the response headers to be truncated early, resulting in some headers being incorporated into the response body. If the later headers have any security pu...Show more
Prior to Apache HTTP Server 2.4.55, a malicious backend can cause the response headers to be truncated early, resulting in some headers being incorporated into the response body. If the later headers have any security purpose, they will not be interpreted by the client.Show less
1Fortinet
1Fortiweb
Jun 17, 2026
Jan 3, 2023
N/A· v4
5.4 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An improper neutralization of CRLF sequences in HTTP headers ('HTTP Response Splitting') vulnerability [CWE-113] In FortiWeb version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiWeb version 6.4.0 through 6.4.2, FortiWeb version 6.3.6 throu...Show more
An improper neutralization of CRLF sequences in HTTP headers ('HTTP Response Splitting') vulnerability [CWE-113] In FortiWeb version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiWeb version 6.4.0 through 6.4.2, FortiWeb version 6.3.6 through 6.3.20 may allow an authenticated and remote attacker to inject arbitrary headers.Show less
2Debian
Netty
2Debian Linux
Netty
Jun 17, 2026
Dec 13, 2022
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Netty project is an event-driven asynchronous network application framework. Starting in version 4.1.83.Final and prior to 4.1.86.Final, when calling `DefaultHttpHeadesr.set` with an _iterator_ of values, header value va...Show more
Netty project is an event-driven asynchronous network application framework. Starting in version 4.1.83.Final and prior to 4.1.86.Final, when calling `DefaultHttpHeadesr.set` with an _iterator_ of values, header value validation was not performed, allowing malicious header values in the iterator to perform HTTP Response Splitting. This issue has been patched in version 4.1.86.Final. Integrators can work around the issue by changing the `DefaultHttpHeaders.set(CharSequence, Iterator<?>)` call, into a `remove()` call, and call `add()` in a loop over the iterator of values.Show less
1Cisco
2Email Security Appliance Firmware
Secure Email And Web Manager Firmware
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 4, 2022
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability in Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) and Cisco Secure Email and Web Manager could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct an HTTP response splitting attack. This vulnerability is due to...Show more
A vulnerability in Cisco Email Security Appliance (ESA) and Cisco Secure Email and Web Manager could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct an HTTP response splitting attack. This vulnerability is due to the failure of the application or its environment to properly sanitize input values. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by injecting malicious HTTP headers, controlling the response body, or splitting the response into multiple responses.Show less
1Apple
1Swiftnio
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 28, 2022
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
NIOHTTP1 and projects using it for generating HTTP responses can be subject to a HTTP Response Injection attack. This occurs when a HTTP/1.1 server accepts user generated input from an incoming request and reflects it in...Show more
NIOHTTP1 and projects using it for generating HTTP responses can be subject to a HTTP Response Injection attack. This occurs when a HTTP/1.1 server accepts user generated input from an incoming request and reflects it into a HTTP/1.1 response header in some form. A malicious user can add newlines to their input (usually in encoded form) and "inject" those newlines into the returned HTTP response. This capability allows users to work around security headers and HTTP/1.1 framing headers by injecting entirely false responses or other new headers. The injected false responses may also be treated as the response to subsequent requests, which can lead to XSS, cache poisoning, and a number of other flaws. This issue was resolved by adding validation to the HTTPHeaders type, ensuring that there's no whitespace incorrectly present in the HTTP headers provided by users. As the existing API surface is non-failable, all invalid characters are replaced by linear whitespace.Show less
1Ge
1Workstationst
Jun 17, 2026
Aug 25, 2022
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An HTTP response splitting vulnerability exists in the AM Gateway Challenge-Response dialog of WorkstationST (<v07.09.15) and could allow an attacker to compromise a victim's browser/session. WorkstationST is only deploy...Show more
An HTTP response splitting vulnerability exists in the AM Gateway Challenge-Response dialog of WorkstationST (<v07.09.15) and could allow an attacker to compromise a victim's browser/session. WorkstationST is only deployed in specific, controlled environments rendering attack complexity significantly higher than if the attack were conducted on the software in isolation. WorkstationST v07.09.15 can be found in ControlST v07.09.07 SP8 and greater.Show less
1Hitachienergy
1Modular Switchgear Monitoring Firmware
Jun 17, 2026
Jul 25, 2022
N/A· v4
8.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability exists in the http web interface where the web interface does not validate data in an HTTP header. This causes a possible HTTP response splitting, which if exploited could lead an attacker to channel down...Show more
A vulnerability exists in the http web interface where the web interface does not validate data in an HTTP header. This causes a possible HTTP response splitting, which if exploited could lead an attacker to channel down harmful code into the user’s web browser, such as to steal the session cookies. Thus, an attacker who successfully makes an MSM user who has already established a session to MSM web interface clicks a forged link to the MSM web interface, e.g., the link is sent per E-Mail, could trick the user into downloading malicious software onto his computer. This issue affects: Hitachi Energy MSM V2.2 and prior versions.Show less
1Juniper
1Junos
Jun 17, 2026
Apr 22, 2021
N/A· v4
9.3 CRITICAL· v3
5.8 MEDIUM· v2
An Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Response Splitting') weakness in J-web of Juniper Networks Junos OS leads to buffer overflows, segment faults, or other impacts, which allows an attacke...Show more
An Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Response Splitting') weakness in J-web of Juniper Networks Junos OS leads to buffer overflows, segment faults, or other impacts, which allows an attacker to modify the integrity of the device and exfiltration information from the device without authentication. The weakness can be exploited to facilitate cross-site scripting (XSS), cookie manipulation (modifying session cookies, stealing cookies) and more. This weakness can also be exploited by directing a user to a seemingly legitimate link from the affected site. The attacker requires no special access or permissions to the device to carry out such attacks. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S11; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S5; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R2-S4, 18.3R3-S3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R2-S5, 18.4R3-S3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R2-S2, 19.1R3-S2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S5, 19.2R2; 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R3; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R1-S3, 19.4R2, 19.4R3; 20.1 versions prior to 20.1R1-S2, 20.1R2. This issue does not affect Juniper Networks Junos OS versions prior to 18.1R1.Show less
1Cisco
2Content Security Management Appliance
Web Security Appliance
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 23, 2020
N/A· v4
4.7 MEDIUM· v3
4.3 MEDIUM· v2
A vulnerability in the API Framework of Cisco AsyncOS for Cisco Web Security Appliance (WSA) and Cisco Content Security Management Appliance (SMA) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to inject crafted HTTP he...Show more
A vulnerability in the API Framework of Cisco AsyncOS for Cisco Web Security Appliance (WSA) and Cisco Content Security Management Appliance (SMA) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to inject crafted HTTP headers in the web server's response. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user to access a crafted URL and receive a malicious HTTP response. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP headers into valid HTTP responses sent to a user's browser.Show less
5Canonical
FedoraprojectLinuxfoundation+2 more
6Ceph
Ceph StorageFedora+3 more
Jun 17, 2026
Jun 26, 2020
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
4.3 MEDIUM· v2
A flaw was found in the Red Hat Ceph Storage RadosGW (Ceph Object Gateway). The vulnerability is related to the injection of HTTP headers via a CORS ExposeHeader tag. The newline character in the ExposeHeader tag in the...Show more
A flaw was found in the Red Hat Ceph Storage RadosGW (Ceph Object Gateway). The vulnerability is related to the injection of HTTP headers via a CORS ExposeHeader tag. The newline character in the ExposeHeader tag in the CORS configuration file generates a header injection in the response when the CORS request is made. Ceph versions 3.x and 4.x are vulnerable to this issue.Show less
1Puma
1Puma
Jun 17, 2026
Mar 2, 2020
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
4.0 MEDIUM· v2
In Puma (RubyGem) before 4.3.3 and 3.12.4, if an application using Puma allows untrusted input in an early-hints header, an attacker can use a carriage return character to end the header and inject malicious content, suc...Show more
In Puma (RubyGem) before 4.3.3 and 3.12.4, if an application using Puma allows untrusted input in an early-hints header, an attacker can use a carriage return character to end the header and inject malicious content, such as additional headers or an entirely new response body. This vulnerability is known as HTTP Response Splitting. While not an attack in itself, response splitting is a vector for several other attacks, such as cross-site scripting (XSS). This is related to CVE-2020-5247, which fixed this vulnerability but only for regular responses. This has been fixed in 4.3.3 and 3.12.4.Show less
4Debian
FedoraprojectPuma+1 more
4Debian Linux
FedoraPuma+1 more
Jun 17, 2026
Feb 28, 2020
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
5.0 MEDIUM· v2
In Puma (RubyGem) before 4.3.2 and before 3.12.3, if an application using Puma allows untrusted input in a response header, an attacker can use newline characters (i.e. `CR`, `LF` or`/r`, `/n`) to end the header and inje...Show more
In Puma (RubyGem) before 4.3.2 and before 3.12.3, if an application using Puma allows untrusted input in a response header, an attacker can use newline characters (i.e. `CR`, `LF` or`/r`, `/n`) to end the header and inject malicious content, such as additional headers or an entirely new response body. This vulnerability is known as HTTP Response Splitting. While not an attack in itself, response splitting is a vector for several other attacks, such as cross-site scripting (XSS). This is related to CVE-2019-16254, which fixed this vulnerability for the WEBrick Ruby web server. This has been fixed in versions 4.3.2 and 3.12.3 by checking all headers for line endings and rejecting headers with those characters.Show less