Resource Allocation Without LimitsWeakness · CWE-770

CVE-2025-9177

HIGH · 7.7 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-10-14
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
86/100
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
A denial-of-service security issue exists in the affected product and version. The security issue stems from a high number of requests sent to the web server. This could result in a web server crash however; this does not impact I/O control or communication . A power cycle is required to recover and utilize the webpage.

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 confidence

This is a denial-of-service vulnerability where an attacker can crash the affected web server by sending a high volume of requests. The web server becomes unresponsive and requires a power cycle to recover. Notably, the underlying I/O control and communication functions remain unaffected by the crash.

MitigationImplement rate limiting at the web server or network perimeter to restrict excessive requests. Consider deploying a web application firewall (WAF) or load balancer to absorb and mitigate high-volume request attacks.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

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
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 web server software and version
    Run commands like 'nginx -v', 'httpd -v', 'apache2 -v', or check the application documentation to determine the exact version of the web server software in use
    Affected if The installed version matches or falls within any affected version range for this CVE (compare against vendor advisory)
  2. Verify rate limiting is configured
    Inspect the web server configuration files (e.g., nginx.conf, httpd.conf, .htaccess) for rate limiting directives such as 'limit_req_zone', 'LimitReqBody', or equivalent rate-limit settings
    Affected if Rate limiting is NOT configured or is set to allow excessively high request volumes that could enable the DoS condition
  3. Confirm WAF or load balancer is deployed
    Check network architecture documentation or inspect for the presence of a web application firewall (WAF), reverse proxy, or load balancer (e.g., ModSecurity, AWS WAF, HAProxy, F5 BIG-IP) in front of the web server
    Affected if No WAF, reverse proxy, or load balancer is present to absorb or mitigate high-volume request attacks
  4. Check for network-level DDoS protection
    Review network infrastructure configurations for DDoS mitigation services or appliances (e.g., cloud provider DDoS protection, dedicated anti-DDoS hardware) that can handle request volume spikes
    Affected if No network-level DDoS protection is in place to filter or absorb volumetric attacks before they reach the web server

A user is affected if their web server is exposed to high-volume request attacks without rate limiting, WAF, load balancer, or DDoS protection in place, and the installed version falls within the affected range.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement rate limiting at the web server or network perimeter to restrict excessive requests. Consider deploying a web application firewall (WAF) or load balancer to absorb and mitigate high-volume request attacks.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9177 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-9177 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