The server in LiteSpeed OpenLiteSpeed before 1.5.0 RC6 does not correctly handle requests for byte sequences, allowing an attacker to amplif
The server in LiteSpeed OpenLiteSpeed before 1.5.0 RC6 does not correctly handle requests for byte sequences, allowing an attacker to amplify the response size by requesting the entire response body repeatedly, as demonstrated by an HTTP Range header value beginning with the "bytes=0-,0-" substring.
- Published
- Dec 3, 2018
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.2% · 68th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-20
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.2%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| litespeedtech | openlitespeed | cpe:2.3:a:litespeedtech:openlitespeed |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- litespeedtech openlitespeedbefore 1.5.0
- litespeedtech openlitespeed1.5.0
Same product
litespeedtech: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2020-5519The WebAdmin Console in OpenLiteSpeed before v1.6.5 does not strictly check request URLs, as demonstrated by the "Server Configuration > Ext39Monitor
- CVE-2022-0073Authenticated Remote Code Execution in OpenLiteSpeed Web Server38Monitor
- CVE-2021-26758Privilege Escalation in LiteSpeed Technologies OpenLiteSpeed web server version 1.7.8 allows attackers to gain root terminal access and exec36Monitor
- CVE-2022-0074Privilege Escalation in OpenLiteSpeed Web Server35Monitor
- CVE-2023-40518LiteSpeed OpenLiteSpeed before 1.7.18 does not strictly validate HTTP request headers.30Monitor
- CVE-2015-3890Use-after-free vulnerability in Open Litespeed before 1.3.10.30Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-20 · Improper Input ValidationCVSS vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Server Side Include (SSI) InjectionCAPEC-101likelihood: High · High
- Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-104likelihood: Medium · High
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Double EncodingCAPEC-120likelihood: Low · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
ATT&CK techniques
- Obfuscated Files or InformationT1027
- Masquerading: Invalid Code SignatureT1036.001
- Steal Web Session CookieT1539
- Subvert Trust Controls: Code SigningT1553.002
- Impair Defenses:Impair Command History LoggingT1562.003
- Hijack Execution Flow:Dynamic Linker HijackingT1574.006
- Hijack Execution Flow:Path Interception by PATH Environment VariableT1574.007
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.