Total
2 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-27293 | 1 Restsharp | 1 Restsharp | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| RestSharp < 106.11.8-alpha.0.13 uses a regular expression which is vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when converting strings into DateTimes. If a server responds with a malicious string, the client using RestSharp will be stuck processing it for an exceedingly long time. Thus the remote server can trigger Denial of Service. | |||||
| CVE-2024-45302 | 1 Restsharp | 1 Restsharp | 2024-10-01 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| RestSharp is a Simple REST and HTTP API Client for .NET. The second argument to `RestRequest.AddHeader` (the header value) is vulnerable to CRLF injection. The same applies to `RestRequest.AddOrUpdateHeader` and `RestClient.AddDefaultHeader`. The way HTTP headers are added to a request is via the `HttpHeaders.TryAddWithoutValidation` method which does not check for CRLF characters in the header value. This means that any headers from a `RestSharp.RequestHeaders` object are added to the request in such a way that they are vulnerable to CRLF-injection. In general, CRLF-injection into a HTTP header (when using HTTP/1.1) means that one can inject additional HTTP headers or smuggle whole HTTP requests. If an application using the RestSharp library passes a user-controllable value through to a header, then that application becomes vulnerable to CRLF-injection. This is not necessarily a security issue for a command line application like the one above, but if such code were present in a web application then it becomes vulnerable to request splitting (as shown in the PoC) and thus Server Side Request Forgery. Strictly speaking this is a potential vulnerability in applications using RestSharp, not in RestSharp itself, but I would argue that at the very least there needs to be a warning about this behaviour in the RestSharp documentation. RestSharp has addressed this issue in version 112.0.0. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability. | |||||