dbcve.org
Conduit HyperApplication · Conduit Hyper Project

CVE-2022-39294

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-10-31
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 0.4.2 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
conduit-hyper integrates a conduit application with the hyper server. Prior to version 0.4.2, `conduit-hyper` did not check any limit on a request's length before calling [`hyper::body::to_bytes`](https://docs.rs/hyper/latest/hyper/body/fn.to_bytes.html). An attacker could send a malicious request with an abnormally large `Content-Length`, which could lead to a panic if memory allocation failed for that request. In version 0.4.2, `conduit-hyper` sets an internal limit of 128 MiB per request, otherwise returning status 400 ("Bad Request"). This crate is part of the implementation of Rust's [crates.io](https://crates.io/), but that service is not affected due to its existing cloud infrastructure, which already drops such malicious requests. Even with the new limit in place, `conduit-hyper` is not recommended for production use, nor to directly serve the public Internet.

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 confidence

The conduit-hyper Rust crate failed to validate request body size before allocating memory in hyper::body::to_bytes. An attacker could send requests with abnormally large Content-Length headers, causing memory allocation failures and panics (denial of service). Version 0.4.2 adds a 128 MiB internal limit, returning HTTP 400 for oversized requests.

MitigationUpgrade conduit-hyper to version 0.4.2 or later, which enforces a 128 MiB request size limit. Alternatively, deploy upstream infrastructure (e.g., reverse proxy, WAF, cloud filtering) to drop requests with suspiciously large Content-Length values.

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
Conduit HyperApplication
Affected:> 0.2.0, < 0.4.2= 0.2.0

CVSS 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:3.1/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed conduit-hyper version
    Check your Cargo.lock file or run `cargo tree -p conduit-hyper` to see the exact version of the conduit-hyper crate being used in your project
    Affected if The version listed is 0.2.0 or any version greater than 0.2.0 but less than 0.4.2 (e.g., 0.3.0, 0.3.1, 0.4.0, 0.4.1)
  2. Verify the crate is handling HTTP request bodies
    Review your application code to confirm it uses conduit-hyper for HTTP request handling (look for imports like `use conduit_hyper::...` or similar patterns)
    Affected if Your application directly uses conduit-hyper to handle incoming HTTP requests with body content
  3. Check for size validation middleware
    Inspect your server configuration or middleware stack to see if any external limit is enforced on Content-Length headers before conduit-hyper processes them
    Affected if No upstream limit is configured and your conduit-hyper version is in the affected range

You are affected if your project uses conduit-hyper version 0.2.0 through 0.4.1 (inclusive) for handling HTTP request bodies without an external Content-Length limit in place.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 0.4.2 or later
Fixed in 0.4.2
Interim mitigation

Upgrade conduit-hyper to version 0.4.2 or later, which enforces a 128 MiB request size limit. Alternatively, deploy upstream infrastructure (e.g., reverse proxy, WAF, cloud filtering) to drop requests with suspiciously large Content-Length values.

Recommended fix High confidence

conduit-hyper version 0.4.2

  1. Check your Cargo.toml file for the conduit-hyper dependency
  2. Update the conduit-hyper version constraint to 0.4.2 or later
  3. Run cargo update conduit-hyper or cargo build to fetch the fixed version
  4. Verify the update was applied successfully
Caveat The 128 MiB per-request limit may reject legitimate requests exceeding this size; evaluate if your use case requires larger limits

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Conduit Hyper Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,720
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,752.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-39294 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-39294 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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