CVE-2021-20252
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 · uneditedA flaw was found in Red Hat 3scale API Management Platform 2. The 3scale backend does not perform preventive handling on user-requested date ranges in certain queries allowing a malicious authenticated user to submit a request with a sufficiently large date range to eventually yield an internal server error resulting in denial of service. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability.
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 · moderate confidenceA denial-of-service vulnerability in Red Hat 3scale API Management Platform 2 where the backend fails to validate or limit user-supplied date ranges in queries, allowing authenticated users to request excessively large date ranges that exhaust resources and trigger internal server errors.
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= 2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm 3scale is installedCheck for 3scale components in the environment: look for '3scale' in running container names, Kubernetes pods, or installed packages. Common locations: /opt/3scale, /var/www/3scale, or Docker/Kubernetes namespaces containing '3scale' or 'apicast'.Affected if 3scale API Management is not present in the environment, the vulnerability does not apply.
-
Verify the 3scale versionCheck the installed version by running: '3scale version' or inspect the version file in the 3scale installation directory. In containerized deployments, check the image tag: 'docker images | grep 3scale' or 'kubectl get pods -n <namespace> -o jsonpath="{.items[*].spec.containers[*].image}"'.Affected if The version is exactly 2.0, the system is affected. Versions other than 2.0 are not within the scope of this CVE.
-
Identify exposed API backend endpointsReview the 3scale backend configuration files (typically in /etc/3scale/backend.yml or through the admin portal under: Product -> Integration -> Configuration). Look for API backend URLs and endpoints that accept query parameters.Affected if The backend API is not exposed or no endpoints accept date range parameters, the attack surface is not present.
-
Locate date-range-accepting endpointsExamine API definitions (OpenAPI/Swagger specs) or backend route configurations for parameters that accept dates or date ranges, such as 'start_date', 'end_date', 'from', 'to', 'date_from', 'date_to', or similar query parameters.Affected if No endpoints accept date range parameters, the vulnerability cannot be exploited through those paths.
-
Review backend access logs for large date rangesCheck 3scale backend logs (typically /var/log/3scale/backend.log or via 'kubectl logs <backend-pod> -n <namespace>') for incoming requests with unusually large date ranges in query parameters. Search for patterns like '?start_date=2010-01-01&end_date=2025-01-01' or similar extensive ranges.Affected if Logs show requests with excessively large date ranges causing 500 errors or resource exhaustion, the vulnerability has been exploited.
The environment is affected only if 3scale API Management version 2.0 is installed, the backend is exposed, and API endpoints accept date range parameters that can be queried by authenticated users.
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 dataImplement input validation to enforce maximum allowable date range limits per query, and add query timeout/abort mechanisms to prevent resource exhaustion from large range requests.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-20252 — 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-2021-20252 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