CVE-2026-28975

MEDIUMPre-NVD 0.0
0.0
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No confirmed exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: 0%CVSS: Exploit: NoneExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

NIOExtras: NIOHTTPRequestDecompressor ratio limit bypass via inflated Content-Length

Impact

When NIOHTTPRequestDecompressor is configured with .ratio(N), the decompression limit is enforced using the Content-Length header value from the incoming request rather than the actual number of compressed bytes received. Since Content-Length is attacker-controlled, a malicious client can supply an inflated value that causes the ratio check to always pass, effectively disabling the configured decompression limit.

This allows an attacker to send a small, highly-compressed payload (a "gzip bomb") with a falsified Content-Length header to bypass the ratio-based protection entirely. The server will decompress the payload without limit, consuming unbounded memory and potentially causing denial of service.

For example, a gzip payload containing highly repetitive data can achieve amplification ratios of several hundred to one. Under .ratio(10) such a payload should be rejected, but if the attacker sets Content-Length to match the decompressed size, the check evaluates decompressed > decompressed * 10 which is always false, and the payload is accepted without error.

Across repeated requests, this allows sustained memory amplification far exceeding the configured limits with no error raised.

Relationship to CVE-2020-9840

GHSA-xhhr-p2r9-jmm7 (CVE-2020-9840) found that the .size limit checked compressed rather than decompressed bytes and recommended .ratio as a workaround. This advisory identifies a distinct flaw in the .ratio limit itself: it uses the attacker-supplied Content-Length header as the denominator rather than actual consumed compressed bytes. The two vulnerabilities are in the same decompression limit enforcement code but involve non-overlapping logic errors.

Users who followed the CVE-2020-9840 workaround by switching to .ratio(N) are affected by this vulnerability.

Patches

Fixed in swift-nio-extras 1.34.1. The fix unifies the request and response decompressor implementations so that both accumulate actual compressed bytes received (compressedLength += part.readableBytes) rather than relying on any header-supplied value.

Workarounds

Use .size(N) instead of .ratio(N) if a fixed upper bound on decompressed output is acceptable for the application. The .size limit is not affected by this vulnerability as it does not reference Content-Length.

Credits

NIOExtras is grateful to @nathanielmiller23 for their reporting and assistance with the process.

CVSS v3
EG Score
0.0(none)
EPSS
13.3%
KEV
Not listed

Published

June 12, 2026

Last Modified

June 12, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-28975(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 0× in last 7d / 4× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-06-15 20:39 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-06-14 23:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-06-13 23:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-06-12 15:11 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-28975?
CVE-2026-28975 is a medium vulnerability published on June 12, 2026. NIOExtras: NIOHTTPRequestDecompressor ratio limit bypass via inflated Content-Length Impact When NIOHTTPRequestDecompressor is configured with .ratio(N), the decompression limit is enforced using the Content-Length header value from the incoming request rather than the actual number of compressed…
When was CVE-2026-28975 disclosed?
CVE-2026-28975 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on June 12, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-28975 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-28975 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 13.3% percentile likelihood of exploitation in the next 30 days — higher percentiles indicate greater predicted risk.
How do I remediate CVE-2026-28975?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-28975, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-28975

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-28975?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.