🛡️ CVE-2026-6790 — jetty
Description
Eclipse Jetty: HTTP Authority/Host mismatch
Summary
Jetty currently accepts HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 requests where the regular
Host header and the pseudo-header :authority
do not match. As a result, the same request can carry two different host identities
through Jetty:
- logic based on
HttpURI/Request.getServerName(request)uses:authority - logic based on raw request headers continues to use
Host
This creates a host/authority confusion condition that can break
security assumptions in higher layers.
Jetty already performs an explicit authority/Host consistency check on
the HTTP/1.1 path, but equivalent validation is missing on the HTTP/2
and HTTP/3 paths.
Security Impact
This issue is not inherently remote code execution, but it can become
security-relevant in deployments that rely on the request host for
security-sensitive decisions, including:
- host-based access control
- virtual host isolation
- multi-tenant routing by hostname
- login/logout/callback URL construction
- reverse proxy and forwarded-header trust chains
- auditing, cache keys, and absolute URL generation
Potential consequences include:
- bypass of host-based ACLs
- virtual host or tenant isolation failures
- incorrect or attacker-influenced redirect/callback targets
- inconsistent proxy/downstream interpretation of the original target host
- misleading logs and audit records
Technical Root Cause
1. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 metadata builder paths:
:authorityis parsed separately into authority/URI stateHostis preserved as a normal request header- the two values are not compared for consistency
2. On the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 server entry paths:
- Jetty calls
ComplianceUtils.verify(httpCompliance, requestMetaData, listener) - this verification does not enforce
MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY
3. On the HTTP/1.1 path:
- Jetty explicitly checks whether authority and
Hostmatch - mismatches are rejected by default
Relevant Code Locations
HTTP/2 metadata builder:
jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-hpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/hpack/internal/MetaDataBuilder.java
HTTP/3 metadata builder:
jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-qpack/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/qpack/internal/metadata/MetaDataBuilder.java
HTTP/2 server entry:
jetty-core/jetty-http2/jetty-http2-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http2/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP2.java
HTTP/3 server entry:
jetty-core/jetty-http3/jetty-http3-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http3/server/internal/HttpStreamOverHTTP3.java
Shared HTTP compliance verification:
jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/ComplianceUtils.java
HTTP/1.1 authority/Host consistency check:
jetty-core/jetty-server/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/server/internal/HttpConnection.java
Defined but not enforced on H2/H3:
jetty-core/jetty-http/src/main/java/org/eclipse/jetty/http/HttpCompliance.java- violation: MISMATCHED_AUTHORITY
Reproduction
I reproduced this on local Jetty 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT source.
Minimal reproduction steps:
1. Start a Jetty HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 test server.
2. Send a request with:
- :authority = localhost:<port>
- Host = evil.example:<port>
3. In the request handler, inspect both:
- Request.getServerName(request)
- request.getHeaders().get(HttpHeader.HOST)
4. Observe whether Jetty rejects the request or allows both values to remain visible.
Observed result:
- HTTP/2: request is accepted and returns 200
- HTTP/3: request is accepted and returns 200
- the server can observe both:
- serverName=localhost
- hostHeader=evil.example:<port>
This shows that a single attacker-controlled request can preserve two conflicting host interpretations inside Jetty.
Tests Used
HTTP/2 rejection test:
org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority
HTTP/2 exploitability test:
org.eclipse.jetty.http2.tests.HTTP2Test#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader
HTTP/3 rejection test:
org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testRejectMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthority
HTTP/3 exploitability test:
org.eclipse.jetty.http3.tests.HandlerClientServerTest#testMismatchedHostHeaderAndAuthoritySplitsAuthorityFromHostHeader
Observed behavior:
- both rejection tests fail because Jetty returns 200 instead of 400
- both exploitability tests pass, confirming that Jetty exposes different host values to different layers
Project-Internal Evidence of Real Impact
Examples:
jetty-openidusesRequest.getServerName(request)to construct redirect URLsjetty-ee11-proxyuses the rawHostheader when buildingForwarded
This indicates that the issue is not merely theoretical: Jetty’s own
ecosystem already contains code paths where different host sources are
used for different purposes.
Affected Version
Confirmed affected version:
- 12.1.9-SNAPSHOT
Othe
How this vulnerability can be exploited
This issue can be reached over the network, attack complexity is low, an attacker needs no privileges on the target. No user interaction is required. The scope is unchanged, so the impact stays within the vulnerable component. Rated impact: confidentiality none, integrity low, availability none.
Weakness class
CVE-2026-6790 is classified as CWE-20: Improper Input Validation. The application accepts input without checking that it has the expected form, so malformed values reach code that assumes they are well formed.
Affected software
CVE-2026-6790 is recorded against 2 packages.
- jetty (from 12.1.0 up to 12.1.9)
- org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server (from 12.1.0 up to 12.1.9)
Timeline and source
Published on 14 July 2026. No public exploit is currently recorded for this entry. Record sourced from NVD.
References
Details
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Affected Packages
| Software | From version | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| jetty | 12.1.0 | 12.1.9 |
| org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server | 12.1.0 | 12.1.9 |
References
Similar Threats
- High CVE-2024-7708
- Low CVE-2025-11143
- High CVE-2025-5115
- High CVE-2024-13009
- High CVE-2025-1948
Vulnerability Monitoring
Track new vulnerabilities in jetty
CVE-2026-6790 is rated CVSS 5.3 Medium. BotEraser monitors your WordPress installation and notifies you when software you use appears in our vulnerability database.
Set Up Free Alerts →No credit card required · Results in minutes
ⓘ Data Notice: The information presented above has been compiled from publicly available internet sources. Boteraser aggregates this data solely for informational purposes and does not independently classify, evaluate, or endorse any findings about the vulnerabilities listed. The accuracy and completeness of this information is the sole responsibility of the original publishers. Boteraser and its operators accept no liability for any decisions made based on this data.