HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2024 40642 absent input validation in binaryhttpparser
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 8.1CVE-2024-40642GHSA-Q8F2-HXQ5-CP4H

Absent Input Validation in BinaryHttpParserCVE-2024-40642

Answer in brief

CVE-2024-40642 records a High severity (CVSS 8.1) vulnerability in Absent Input Validation in BinaryHttpParser. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps io.netty.incubator:netty-incubator-codec-bhttp (maven). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Jul 18, 2024Updated Sep 10, 2026Source checked Oct 26, 2026First seen by HOL Sep 10, 2026Material review Sep 10, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 8.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 8.1. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps io.netty.incubator:netty-incubator-codec-bhttp (maven). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
io.netty.incubator:netty-incubator-codec-bhttpmaven>=0 <0.0.13.Final0.0.13.Final

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for io.netty.incubator:netty-incubator-codec-bhttp.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update io.netty.incubator:netty-incubator-codec-bhttp to 0.0.13.Final if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Jul 18, 2024

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Sep 10, 2026

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Sep 10, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

### Summary `BinaryHttpParser` does not properly validate input values thus giving attackers almost complete control over the HTTP requests constructed from the parsed output. Attackers can abuse several issues individually to perform various injection attacks including HTTP request smuggling, desync attacks, HTTP header injections, request queue poisoning, caching attacks and Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF). Attacker could also combine several issues to create well-formed messages for other text-based protocols which may result in attacks beyond the HTTP protocol. ### Details **Path, Authority, Scheme** The BinaryHttpParser class implements the readRequestHead method which performs most of the relevant parsing of the received request. The data structure prefixes values with a variable length integer value. The algorithm to create a variable length integer value is below: ``` def encode_int(n): if n < 64: base = 0x00 l = 1 elif n in range(64, 16384): base = 0x4000 l = 2 elif n in range(16384, 1073741824): base = 0x80000000 l = 4 else: base = 0xc000000000000000 l = 8 encoded = base | n return encoded.to_bytes() ``` The parsing code below first gets the lengths of the values from the prefixed variable length integer. After it has all of the lengths and calculates all of the indices, the parser casts the applicable slices of the ByteBuf to String. Finally, it passes these values into a new `DefaultBinaryHttpRequest` object where no further parsing or validation occurs. ``` //netty-incubator-codec-ohttp/codec-bhttp/src/main/java/io/netty/incubator/codec/bhttp/BinaryHttpParser.java public final class BinaryHttpParser { ... private static BinaryHttpRequest readRequestHead(ByteBuf in, boolean knownLength, int maxFieldSectionSize) { ... final long pathLength = getVariableLengthInteger(in, pathLengthIdx, pathLengthBytes); ... final int pathIdx = pathLengthIdx + pathLengthBytes; ... /*417*/ String method = in.toString(methodIdx, (int) methodLength, StandardCharsets.US_ASCII); /*418*/ String scheme = in.toString(schemeIdx, (int) schemeLength, StandardCharsets.US_ASCII); /*419*/ String authority = in.toString(authorityIdx, (int) authorityLength, StandardCharsets.US_ASCII); /*420*/ String path = in.toString(pathIdx, (int) pathLength, StandardCharsets.US_ASCII); /*422*/ BinaryHttpRequest request = new DefaultBinaryHttpRequest(HttpVersion.HTTP_1_1, HttpMethod.valueOf(method), scheme, authority, path, headers); in.skipBytes(sumBytes); return request; } ... } ``` **Request Method** On line 422 above, the parsed method value is passed into `HttpMethod.valueOf` method. The return value from this is passed to the `DefaultBinaryHttpRequest` constructor. Below is the code for HttpMethod.valueOf: ``` public static HttpMethod valueOf(String name) { // fast-path if (name == HttpMethod.GET.name()) { return HttpMethod.GET; } if (name == HttpMethod.POST.name()) { return HttpMethod.POST; } // "slow"-path HttpMethod result = methodMap.get(name); return result != null ? result : new HttpMethod(name); } ``` If the result of `methodMap.get` is not `null`, then a new arbitrary `HttpMethod` instance will be returned using the provided name value. `methodMap` is an instance of type `EnumNameMap` which is also defined within the `HttpMethod` class: ``` EnumNameMap(Node<T>... nodes) { this.values = (Node[])(new Node[MathUtil.findNextPositivePowerOfTwo(nodes.length)]); this.valuesMask = this.values.length - 1; Node[] var2 = nodes; int var3 = nodes.length; for(int var4 = 0; var4 < var3; ++var4) { Node<T> node = var2[var4]; int i = hashCode(node.key) & this.valuesMask; if (this.values[i] != null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("index " + i + " collision between values: [" + this.values[i].key + ", " + node.key + ']'); } this.values[i] = node; } } T get(String name) { Node<T> node = this.values[hashCode(name) & this.valuesMask]; return node != null && node.key.equals(name) ? node.value : null; } ``` Note that `EnumNameMap.get()` returns a boolean value, which is not `null`. Therefore, any arbitrary http verb used within a `BinaryHttpRequest` will yield a valid `HttpMethod` object. When the `HttpMethod` object is constructed, the name is checked for whitespace and similar characters. Therefore, we cannot perform complete injection attacks using the HTTP verb alone. However, when combined with the other input validation issues, such as that in the path field, we can construct somewhat arbitrary data blobs that satisfy text-based protocol message formats. ### Impact Method is partially validated while other values are not validated at all. Software that relies on netty to apply input validation for binary HTTP data may be vulnerable to various injection and protocol based attacks.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
SSRF
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
OSV
Source checked
Oct 26, 2026
References
4 linked sources
Open source record