Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
💎
💎 RubyGems
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 — rack

MEDIUM

GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 is a medium-severity (CVSS 4.8) CWE-436 vulnerability in rack. A fix is available for rack — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Rack: Forwarded Header semicolon injection enables Host and Scheme spoofing

Also known asCVE-2026-32762
Published
Apr 2, 2026
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
2 pkgs
Patched
2 / 2
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 24, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs14th percentile — riskier than 14% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 379,145 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

2 pkgs affected
💎rack💎rack

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects RubyGems packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

Rack::Utils.forwarded_values parses the RFC 7239 Forwarded header by splitting on semicolons before handling quoted-string values. Because quoted values may legally contain semicolons, a header such as:

Forwarded: for="127.0.0.1;host=evil.com;proto=https"

can be interpreted by Rack as multiple Forwarded directives rather than as a single quoted for value.

In deployments where an upstream proxy, WAF, or intermediary validates or preserves quoted Forwarded values differently, this discrepancy can allow an attacker to smuggle host, proto, for, or by parameters through a single header value.

Details

Rack::Utils.forwarded_values processes the header using logic equivalent to:

forwarded_header.split(';').each_with_object({}) do |field, values|
  field.split(',').each do |pair|
    pair = pair.split('=').map(&:strip).join('=')
    return nil unless pair =~ /\A(by|for|host|proto)="?([^"]+)"?\Z/i
    (values[$1.downcase.to_sym] ||= []) << $2
  end
end

The method splits on ; before it parses individual name=value pairs. This is inconsistent with RFC 7239, which permits quoted-string values, and quoted strings may contain semicolons as literal content.

As a result, a header value such as:

Forwarded: for="127.0.0.1;host=evil.com;proto=https"

is not treated as a single for value. Instead, Rack may interpret it as if the client had supplied separate for, host, and proto directives.

This creates an interpretation conflict when another component in front of Rack treats the quoted value as valid literal content, while Rack reparses it as multiple forwarding parameters.

Impact

Applications that rely on Forwarded to derive request metadata may observe attacker-controlled values for host, proto, for, or related URL components.

In affected deployments, this can lead to host or scheme spoofing in derived values such as req.host, req.scheme, req.base_url, or req.url. Applications that use those values for password reset links, redirects, absolute URL generation, logging, IP-based decisions, or backend requests may be vulnerable to downstream security impact.

The practical security impact depends on deployment architecture. If clients can already supply arbitrary trusted Forwarded parameters directly, this bug may not add meaningful attacker capability. The issue is most relevant where an upstream component and Rack interpret the same Forwarded header differently.

Mitigation

  • Update to a patched version of Rack that parses Forwarded quoted-string values before splitting on parameter delimiters.
  • Avoid trusting client-supplied Forwarded headers unless they are normalized or regenerated by a trusted reverse proxy.
  • Prefer stripping inbound Forwarded headers at the edge and reconstructing them from trusted proxy metadata.
  • Avoid using req.host, req.scheme, req.base_url, or req.url for security-sensitive operations unless the forwarding chain is explicitly trusted and validated.

Affected Packages

2 total 2 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
💎RubyGemsrack≥ 3.0.0.beta1&&< 3.1.213.1.21bundle update rack --conservative
💎RubyGemsrack≥ 3.2.0&&< 3.2.63.2.6bundle update rack --conservative

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for rack, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update rack to 3.1.21 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

UbuntuMEDIUM

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary `Rack::Utils.forwarded_values` parses the RFC 7239 `Forwarded` header by splitting on semicolons before handling quoted-string values. Because quoted values may legally contain semicolons, a header such as: ```http Forwarded: for="127.0.0.1;host=evil.com;proto=https" ``` can be interpreted by Rack as multiple `Forwarded` directives rather than as a single quoted `for` value. In deployments where an upstream proxy, WAF, or intermediary validates or preserves quoted `Forwarded` values differently, this discrepancy can allow an attacker to smuggle `host`, `proto`, `for`, or `by` pa
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49 across RubyGems dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49: rack (Medium 4.8) | O3 Security