CVE-2023-38199
Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it.
coreruleset (aka OWASP ModSecurity Core Rule Set) through 3.3.4 does not detect multiple Content-Type request headers on some platforms. This might allow attackers to bypass a WAF with a crafted payload, aka "Content-Type confusion"… More
coreruleset (aka OWASP ModSecurity Core Rule Set) through 3.3.4 does not detect multiple Content-Type request headers on some platforms. This might allow attackers to bypass a WAF with a crafted payload, aka "Content-Type confusion" between the WAF and the backend application. This occurs when the web application relies on only the last Content-Type header. Other platforms may reject the additional Content-Type header or merge conflicting headers, leading to detection as a malformed header.
Edge coverage
Claimed by vendorsAsk Vigil
AI · answers from this pageWorkers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.
Severity, decoded
CISA has seen no public exploit and no attacks.
Attackers can script the attack end to end and hit many targets at once.
A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.
Public exploits
None foundNo exploit in Exploit-DB or Metasploit, and no scanner template. That lowers, but doesn't remove, the chance of mass exploitation.
Timeline
- 2023-07-13CVE publishedCVE List
- 2023-07-18OWASP CRS ships a ruleBackport fix for CVE-2023-38199 from CRS v4 via new rule 920620 (Andrea Menin, Felipe Zipitría)
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
AWSAWS WAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.
Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.
Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rules
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patches
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each signature lists the CVEs it references, with its id and date. F5 does not state a default action; signatures enforce once staging ends in your policy.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)
This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.
OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)
First rule 2023-07-18, 5 days after the CVE was published.
Backport fix for CVE-2023-38199 from CRS v4 via new rule 920620 (Andrea Menin, Felipe Zipitría)
feat: add new rule to explicitly detect multiple Content-Type abuse (CVE-2023-38199) (920620 PL1) (Andrea Menin) [#3237]
Social
No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.