NifiApplication · Apache
CVE-2018-17194
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedWhen a client request to a cluster node was replicated to other nodes in the cluster for verification, the Content-Length was forwarded. On a DELETE request, the body was ignored, but if the initial request had a Content-Length value other than 0, the receiving nodes would wait for the body and eventually timeout. Mitigation: The fix to check DELETE requests and overwrite non-zero Content-Length header values was applied on the Apache NiFi 1.8.0 release. Users running a prior 1.x release should upgrade to the appropriate release.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceIn Apache NiFi clusters, when a client request is replicated to other nodes for verification, the Content-Length header is forwarded. On DELETE requests, the body should be ignored, but if the original request had a non-zero Content-Length value, receiving nodes wait for a body that never arrives, causing timeouts.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
NifiApplication
>= 1.0.0, <= 1.7.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed NiFi versionCheck the version by reviewing the nifi-version file in the NiFi installation directory, or log into the NiFi web UI and look at the version displayed in the footer of any pageAffected if The version is 1.0.0 through 1.7.1 inclusive
-
Confirm NiFi is running in cluster modeExamine the nifi.properties file for the 'nifi.cluster.is.node' property set to 'true', or check the cluster configuration in the NiFi UI under the Cluster menuAffected if NiFi is configured as a node in a cluster (this vulnerability only affects cluster deployments)
-
Verify cluster communications are enabledCheck that 'nifi.cluster.protocol.heartbeat.interval' and cluster protocol properties are configured in nifi.properties, indicating inter-node replication is activeAffected if Cluster communication and request replication between nodes is enabled
You are affected if your NiFi version is between 1.0.0 and 1.7.1 AND the NiFi instance is configured as part of a cluster where DELETE requests with non-zero Content-Length headers are replicated to other nodes.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to Apache NiFi 1.8.0 or later, which implements proper handling of DELETE requests by checking for and overwriting non-zero Content-Length header values.
Fix this in Nifi
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,144.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-17194 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-17194 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data