Skip to content

GHSA-q2ww-5357-x388 CVE-2026-34831

Rack has Content-Length mismatch in Rack::Files error responses

Medium RubyGems
Severity
4.8 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.15%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 4.38% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-130 Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency
CWE-135 Incorrect Calculation of Multi-Byte String Length
Fix
2.2.23
Upgrade rack to this version or later

Description

Summary

Rack::Files#fail sets the Content-Length response header using String#size instead of String#bytesize. When the response body contains multibyte UTF-8 characters, the declared Content-Length is smaller than the number of bytes actually sent on the wire.

Because Rack::Files reflects the requested path in 404 responses, an attacker can trigger this mismatch by requesting a non-existent path containing percent-encoded UTF-8 characters.

This results in incorrect HTTP response framing and may cause response desynchronization in deployments that rely on the incorrect Content-Length value.

Details

Rack::Files#fail constructs error responses using logic equivalent to:

def fail(status, body, headers = {})
  body += "\n"
  [
    status,
    {
      "content-type" => "text/plain",
      "content-length" => body.size.to_s,
      "x-cascade" => "pass"
    }.merge!(headers),
    [body]
  ]
end

Here, body.size returns the number of characters, not the number of bytes. For multibyte UTF-8 strings, this produces an incorrect Content-Length value.

Rack::Files includes the decoded request path in 404 responses. A request containing percent-encoded UTF-8 path components therefore causes the response body to contain multibyte characters, while the Content-Length header still reflects character count rather than byte count.

As a result, the server can send more bytes than declared in the response headers.

This violates HTTP message framing requirements, which define Content-Length as the number of octets in the message body.

Impact

Applications using Rack::Files may emit incorrectly framed error responses when handling requests for non-existent paths containing multibyte characters.

In some deployment topologies, particularly with keep-alive connections and intermediaries that rely on Content-Length, this mismatch may lead to response parsing inconsistencies or response desynchronization. The practical exploitability depends on the behavior of downstream proxies, clients, and connection reuse.

Even where no secondary exploitation is possible, the response is malformed and may trigger protocol errors in strict components.

Mitigation

  • Update to a patched version of Rack that computes Content-Length using String#bytesize.
  • Avoid exposing Rack::Files directly to untrusted traffic until a fix is available, if operationally feasible.
  • Where possible, place Rack behind a proxy or server that normalizes or rejects malformed backend responses.
  • Prefer closing backend connections on error paths if response framing anomalies are a concern.

Affected versions

RubyGems

PackageVulnerableFixed in
rack
< 2.2.23
2.2.23
rack
>= 3.0.0.beta1, < 3.1.21
3.1.21
rack
>= 3.2.0, < 3.2.6
3.2.6

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

rack RubyGems → 2.2.23

bundler
bundle update rack # Gemfile: gem "rack", ">= 2.2.23"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 4.8

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-130: Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency

The product parses a formatted message or structure, but it does not handle or incorrectly handles a length field that is inconsistent with the actual length of the associated data.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: When processing structured incoming data containing a size field followed by raw data, ensure that you identify and resolve any inconsistencies between the size field and the actual size of the data.
  • Implementation: Do not let the user control the size of the buffer.
  • Implementation: Validate that the length of the user-supplied data is consistent with the buffer size.

CWE-135: Incorrect Calculation of Multi-Byte String Length

The product does not correctly calculate the length of strings that can contain wide or multi-byte characters.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: Always verify the length of the string unit character.
  • Implementation: Use length computing functions (e.g. strlen, wcslen, etc.) appropriately with their equivalent type (e.g.: byte, wchar_t, etc.)

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-g2pf-xv49-m2h5
Rack::Request accepts invalid Host characters, enabling host allowlist bypass
Medium Also affects rack
GHSA-v6x5-cg8r-vv6x
Rack's multipart header parsing allows Denial of Service via escape-heavy quoted parameters
High Also affects rack
GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49
Rack: Forwarded Header semicolon injection enables Host and Scheme spoofing
Medium Also affects rack
GHSA-rx22-g9mx-qrhv
Rack's improper unfolding of folded multipart headers preserves CRLF in parsed parameter values
Medium Also affects rack
GHSA-qv7j-4883-hwh7
Rack::Sendfile header-based X-Accel-Mapping regex injection enables unauthorized X-Accel-Redirect
High Also affects rack
GHSA-8vqr-qjwx-82mw
Rack's multipart parsing without Content-Length header allows unbounded chunked file uploads
High Also affects rack
GHSA-x8cg-fq8g-mxfx
Rack's multipart byte range processing allows denial of service via excessive overlapping ranges
High Also affects rack
GHSA-q4qf-9j86-f5mh
Rack:: Static header_rules bypass via URL-encoded paths
Medium Also affects rack
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor