Unbounded memory accumulation in the stream message reassembly path of Apache bRPC (version < 1.18.0) on all platforms allows remote attackers to exhaust the memory of a server (denial of service) by sending an endless sequence of continuation data frames.
Root Cause:
The streaming RPC protocol bounds every single data frame by max_body_size, but a fragmented stream message accumulates continuation frames into one buffer (_pending_buf) without any limit on the accumulated size. A malicious peer that can open a stream can therefore keep sending continuation frames to make the receiver accumulate an arbitrarily large in-memory message. Since the default flow-control settings (socket_max_streams_unconsumed_bytes=0) do not throttle the sending rate, the receiver's memory grows until the process runs out of memory and crashes or becomes unavailable.
Affected Scenarios:
Services that accept streams from untrusted clients (for example using brpc::StreamAccept or brpc::StreamCreate with the built-in streaming protocol) are affected.
How to Fix:
(Choose one of the following options)
- Upgrade bRPC to version 1.18.0, which fixes this issue.
- Apply this patch: https://github.com/apache/brpc/pull/3489
Note:
The fix limits the accumulated payload of a fragmented stream message to max_body_size (default 64MB). When the accumulated payload exceeds the limit, the pending fragments are released and the stream is closed with error EMSGSIZE. After applying the fix, legitimate fragmented stream messages larger than max_body_size will be rejected; you can adjust the gflag max_body_size to change the limit.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-22). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the BOD 26-04 block below.
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it