CVE-2022-45060
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 · uneditedAn HTTP Request Forgery issue was discovered in Varnish Cache 5.x and 6.x before 6.0.11, 7.x before 7.1.2, and 7.2.x before 7.2.1. An attacker may introduce characters through HTTP/2 pseudo-headers that are invalid in the context of an HTTP/1 request line, causing the Varnish server to produce invalid HTTP/1 requests to the backend. This could, in turn, be used to exploit vulnerabilities in a server behind the Varnish server. Note: the 6.0.x LTS series (before 6.0.11) is affected.
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 confidenceVarnish Cache does not properly sanitize HTTP/2 pseudo-headers during conversion to HTTP/1 when proxying requests to backends. Attackers can inject invalid characters via HTTP/2 requests that result in malformed HTTP/1 request lines being forwarded to backend servers, potentially exploiting vulnerabilities in those backends.
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= 35= 36= 37= 10.0= 11.0>= 6.0.0, < 6.0.11= 6.0.0= 6.0.1= 6.0.2= 6.0.3= 6.0.4= 6.0.5= 6.0.6= 6.0.7= 6.0.8= 6.0.9= 6.0.10>= 5.0.0, < 6.0.11>= 7.0.0, < 7.1.2= 7.2.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
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 installed Varnish versionRun 'varnishd -V' or check package manager output (e.g., 'rpm -q varnish' on Fedora/RHEL, 'dpkg -l varnish' on Debian)Affected if Version is 5.x, 6.0.0-6.0.10, 7.0.0-7.1.1, or 7.2.0 (falls within the affected ranges)
-
Verify HTTP/2 protocol is enabled on the frontendInspect VCL configuration file (typically /etc/varnish/default.vcl) for 'h2' parameter in the 'vcl_recv' or frontend listener section, or check running config with 'varnishd -C' and search for 'h2' or 'proto' settingsAffected if HTTP/2 (h2) is enabled as a frontend protocol - the flaw only triggers when HTTP/2 requests are received
-
Confirm backend connections use HTTP/1Inspect VCL for backend definitions and check the 'proxy_header' or 'proto' settings. Look for backends defined without explicit HTTP/2 protocol, which default to HTTP/1 for backend connectionsAffected if Backends are configured to use HTTP/1 (the default) while frontend accepts HTTP/2 - this creates the HTTP/2 to HTTP/1 conversion path that triggers the flaw
-
Check for HTTP/2 to backend proxyingReview VCL backend probe configurations and the 'http' block settings. The vulnerability activates when HTTP/2 frontend connections are proxied to HTTP/1 backendsAffected if Frontend accepts HTTP/2 traffic AND proxies to HTTP/1 backends simultaneously
You are affected if running a vulnerable Varnish version AND HTTP/2 is enabled on the frontend while backends use HTTP/1, enabling the conversion path where malformed request lines can be injected.
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.
dbcve · scoped6.0.117.1.2
Upgrade Varnish Cache to version 6.0.11, 7.1.2, 7.2.1 or later to patch the HTTP/2 to HTTP/1 header sanitization flaw.
6.0.11 (for 6.x), 7.1.2 (for 7.0-7.1.x), or 7.2.1 (for 7.2.x)
- Identify the currently installed Varnish Cache version using 'varnishd -V'
- For Varnish Cache 6.0.x: upgrade to version 6.0.11 or later
- For Varnish Cache 7.0.x - 7.1.x: upgrade to version 7.1.2 or later
- For Varnish Cache 7.2.0: upgrade to version 7.2.1 or later
- Verify the upgrade was successful by running 'varnishd -V'
- Restart the Varnish service to load the new version using 'systemctl restart varnish'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-45060 — 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-2022-45060 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