CVE-2026-24880
Apache Tomcat 9.0.0 – 9.0.116
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-24880 is a high-severity HTTP Request/Response Smuggling (CWE-444) vulnerability in Apache Tomcat. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 42th 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 SC-7 (Boundary Protection) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-24880 is an Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests vulnerability, classified as HTTP Request/Response Smuggling (CWE-444), in Apache Tomcat due to handling of invalid chunk extensions. It affects Apache Tomcat versions 11.0.0-M1 through 11.0.18, 10.1.0-M1 through 10.1.52, 9.0.0.M1 through 9.0.115, 8.5.0 through 8.5.100, and 7.0.0 through 7.0.109. Other unsupported versions may also be affected.
Remote attackers with network access can exploit this vulnerability without privileges or user interaction, as indicated by its CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N). Successful exploitation enables HTTP request/response smuggling, resulting in high integrity impact.
Apache advisories recommend upgrading to Tomcat 11.0.20, 10.1.52, or 9.0.116 to mitigate the issue. Additional details are provided in the Apache mailing list at https://lists.apache.org/thread/2c682qnlg2tv4o5knlggqbl9yc2gb5sn and the OSS-Security announcement at http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/04/09/20.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-21006
Vulnerability Data
Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') vulnerability in Apache Tomcat via invalid chunk extension. This issue affects Apache Tomcat: from 11.0.0-M1 through 11.0.18, from 10.1.0-M1 through 10.1.52, from 9.0.0.M1 through 9.0.115, from 8.5.0 through 8.5.100, from 7.0.0 through…
more
7.0.109. Other, unsupported versions may also be affected. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 11.0.20, 10.1.52 or 9.0.116, which fix the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V4.1.3V4.2.4V1.5.3V4.1.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Boundary protection at external interfaces can enforce consistent HTTP request/response parsing rules between intermediaries and endpoints.
Validating HTTP inputs at the intermediary prevents malformed messages from being interpreted inconsistently downstream.
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.
Configuration management can enforce uniform HTTP parsing rules across intermediaries, directly mitigating inconsistent interpretation.
Network monitoring can detect smuggling attempts via anomalous HTTP traffic or logs, while eliminating the inconsistency directly aids detection of such events.
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.
Security testing can detect HTTP request smuggling vulnerabilities in intermediary components.
Network security controls can enforce consistent HTTP parsing and proxy behavior that mitigates request smuggling.
Secure network services include hardening proxies and gateways against inconsistent HTTP interpretation.
Secure SDLC practices require threat modeling and testing for HTTP parsing inconsistencies in intermediaries.
Application security requirements can mandate strict HTTP message validation and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles include consistent protocol handling and defense-in-depth for proxies.