A flaw was found in Undertow where malformed client requests can trigger server-side stream resets without triggering abuse counters. This issue, referred to as the "MadeYouReset" attack, allows malicious clients to induce excessive server workload by repeatedly causing server-side stream aborts. While not a protocol bug, this highlights a common implementation weakness that can be exploited to cause a denial of service (DoS).
Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
CVE-2025-9784 is a remotely triggerable denial-of-service weakness in Undertow’s HTTP/2 request handling. Malicious clients can repeatedly make the server reset streams without activating intended abuse counters, consuming resources and potentially disrupting applications. The issue affects availability, not confidentiality or data integrity.
Executive priority
Prioritize remediation for externally reachable business services because an unauthenticated attacker could degrade availability. Patch according to vendor guidance on an expedited schedule, while confirming exact product applicability to avoid acting on ambiguous package mappings. Internal-only or HTTP/2-disabled deployments can follow after exposure is verified.
Technical view
Malformed HTTP/2 client requests can cause Undertow to initiate stream resets that evade abuse accounting. Repetition can impose excessive server workload and exhaust resources. The issue is classified under CWE-404 and CWE-770 and scored CVSS 3.1 7.5: network-accessible, low-complexity, unauthenticated, and availability-impacting.
Likely exposure
Highest exposure exists where affected Undertow or Red Hat JBoss EAP services accept HTTP/2 traffic from untrusted networks. The bundle identifies multiple EAP 7.1, 7.3, 7.4, and 8.0 packages as affected, but also contains unaffected entries and incomplete version ranges; verify exact installed packages against Red Hat guidance.
Exploitation context
The supplied record is not in CISA KEV and provides no evidence of active exploitation. Exploitation is nevertheless plausible because the vulnerability is remotely reachable, requires no privileges or user interaction, and has low stated attack complexity. Treat internet-facing HTTP/2 services as the priority exposure group.
Researcher notes
The weakness is described as an implementation-level MadeYouReset condition, not an HTTP/2 protocol defect. Server-generated stream aborts bypass abuse counters, enabling asymmetric resource consumption. The source bundle’s affected-product data includes mixed affected and unaffected entries and some unexpected package mappings, so vendor advisory correlation is essential before declaring a host vulnerable.
Mitigation direction
Apply the Red Hat erratum matching the installed JBoss EAP product, operating system, and support channel.
Review Undertow’s upstream release and vendor guidance before selecting a fixed version.
Restrict untrusted HTTP/2 access where operationally feasible until applicable updates are installed.
Use rate limiting and resource protections as supplementary controls, not substitutes for vendor remediation.
Validation and detection
Inventory Undertow and JBoss EAP versions, package builds, operating systems, and support channels.
Confirm whether each service enables HTTP/2 and is reachable from untrusted networks.
Compare installed package builds with the applicable Red Hat CVE page and erratum.
After updating, verify package versions and monitor for abnormal stream resets or resource consumption.
Avoid destructive proof-of-concept testing on production systems.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Potential ATT&CK relevance
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
cwe · low confidence lookup
CWE-404: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.