Limit proxy protocol header to 256 bytes - #3199
Open
gbrodman wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
The maximum length for the proxy header according to https://www.haproxy.org/download/1.8/doc/proxy-protocol.txt is actually 108 bytes but we use 256 just to be safe. We don't want to allow a potential attacker to send a continuous slow stream of characters, possibly causing an OOM. All of our traffic should come through the load balancer so this shouldn't be an issue; this is just defense-in-depth D.4 12 b/535251420
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The maximum length for the proxy header according to https://www.haproxy.org/download/1.8/doc/proxy-protocol.txt is actually 108 bytes but we use 256 just to be safe.
We don't want to allow a potential attacker to send a continuous slow stream of characters, possibly causing an OOM.
All of our traffic should come through the load balancer so this shouldn't be an issue; this is just defense-in-depth
D.4 12
b/535251420
This change is