Uncontrolled resource consumption in the streaming RPC component of Apache bRPC (version < 1.18.0) allows a remote attacker to exhaust server memory and cause denial of service by sending a single RPC request that declares an excessive number of streams.
Root Cause:
In the streaming RPC feature, a client can declare multiple streams in one RPC request by putting extra stream identifiers into the repeated field stream_settings.extra_stream_ids of the RPC meta. On the server side, StreamAccept creates one response stream for every stream identifier declared by the request, without limiting the number of streams accepted in a single RPC. The request body size is only bounded by max_body_size (default 64MB), which is enough to carry millions of stream identifiers. Each accepted stream allocates its own bthread execution queue and associated resources, so a single crafted request can make the server create a huge number of streams and exhaust memory, leading to denial of service.
Affected Scenarios:
Use a bRPC server that serves streaming RPC and calls StreamAccept to accept streams from untrusted clients.
How to Fix:
(Choose one of the following options)
- Upgrade bRPC to the 1.18.0 version.
- Apply this patch: https://github.com/apache/brpc/pull/3493
Note:
The fix adds a new gflag stream_max_streams_per_request with a default value of 64. Requests declaring more streams than the limit are rejected before any response stream is created. Applications that legitimately need to accept more than 64 streams in one RPC must raise this flag; otherwise such requests will fail after applying the fix.
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