CVE-2026-70399

httpd does not enforce the documented default max_clients connection limit

HIGH
8.7
CVSS Score
Published: September 1, 2026 at 02:33 PM UTC
Updated: September 8, 2026 at 01:17 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorErlang /otp

Using OTP by Erlang?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect OTP - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH8.7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.9%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling vulnerability in Erlang/OTP inets httpd allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause denial of service by opening and holding open a large number of connections. The max_clients option is documented to default to 150, and the inets hardening guide presents that limit as the first layer of denial-of-service defence, but a server that does not set it explicitly accepts an unlimited number of simultaneous connections. Establishing the connections is sufficient; no valid request and no authentication are required. The accept gate in httpd_manager:handle_new_connection/4 reads the option with httpd_util:lookup/2, which returns undefined when the key is absent, rather than the three-argument form carrying the 150 default that the neighbouring get_ustate/2 uses. Erlang term ordering places every integer before every atom, so the Count =< Max guard holds for any connection count and the server never returns {reject, busy}. Each accepted connection occupies a worker process and a socket for as long as it is held, driving the node towards process, memory and file descriptor exhaustion. Servers that set max_clients explicitly are unaffected, because a configured value is applied as intended. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 27.3.4.17, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.6, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.6, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.3.2.7, from 9.4 before 9.6.2.3, and from 9.7 before 9.7.2.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

17.0 ≤ v < 27.3.4.1728.0 ≤ v < 28.5.0.629.0 ≤ v < 29.0.65.10 ≤ v < 9.3.2.79.4 ≤ v < 9.6.2.39.7 ≤ v < 9.7.217.028.029.05.109.49.7d9674f32811cd5bb02b0d6656053b5ee226bc74c
Affected range stops below 27.3.4.17, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 28.5.0.6, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 29.0.6, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 9.3.2.7, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 9.6.2.3, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 9.7.2, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitAutomatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

8.7HIGHEEF
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED
CWE
CWE-770

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card