Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-29904

Jetbrains Ktor ≤ 3.1.1

Published
12 March 2025
Modified
02 October 2025
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0031 23th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-29904 is a medium-severity HTTP Request/Response Smuggling (CWE-444) vulnerability in Jetbrains Ktor. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 23th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In JetBrains Ktor before 3.1.1 an HTTP Request Smuggling was possible

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-49580Same product: Jetbrains Ktor
CVE-2023-45612Same product: Jetbrains Ktor
CVE-2023-34339Same product: Jetbrains Ktor
CVE-2023-45613Same product: Jetbrains Ktor
CVE-2023-39175Same vendor: Jetbrains
CVE-2024-54156Same vendor: Jetbrains
CVE-2025-64684Same vendor: Jetbrains
CVE-2025-42921Same vendor: Jetbrains
CVE-2025-54538Same vendor: Jetbrains
CVE-2024-47950Same vendor: Jetbrains

Affected Assets

jetbrains
ktor
≤ 3.1.1

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
  • SC-7 Boundary Protection
  • AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V4.1.3
  • V4.2.4
  • V1.5.3
  • V4.1.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Strict validation of HTTP request headers and message framing directly blocks the inconsistent parsing that enables request smuggling in Ktor < 3.1.1.

prevent

Boundary-protection devices (WAFs, reverse proxies) with correct HTTP normalization stop smuggling attempts before they reach the vulnerable Ktor backend.

prevent

Enforcing information-flow rules on HTTP request streams prevents attackers from crafting requests that bypass intended access-control boundaries via smuggling.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-01 mostly match
prevents

Configuration management can enforce uniform HTTP parsing rules across intermediaries, directly mitigating inconsistent interpretation.

DE.CM-01 partial match
prevents

Network monitoring can detect smuggling attempts via anomalous HTTP traffic or logs, while eliminating the inconsistency directly aids detection of such events.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network protections can enforce consistent HTTP proxy/firewall behavior to block smuggling, and removing the weakness helps prevent unauthorized access via request smuggling.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

detects

Security testing can detect HTTP request smuggling vulnerabilities in intermediary components.

degrades

Network security controls can enforce consistent HTTP parsing and proxy behavior that mitigates request smuggling.

degrades

Secure network services include hardening proxies and gateways against inconsistent HTTP interpretation.

prevents

Secure SDLC practices require threat modeling and testing for HTTP parsing inconsistencies in intermediaries.

prevents

Application security requirements can mandate strict HTTP message validation and canonicalization.

prevents

Secure architecture principles include consistent protocol handling and defense-in-depth for proxies.

References