Skip to content

Rack: Forwarded Header semicolon injection enables Host and Scheme spoofing

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 1, 2026 in rack/rack • Updated Apr 2, 2026

Package

bundler rack (RubyGems)

Affected versions

>= 3.0.0.beta1, < 3.1.21
>= 3.2.0, < 3.2.6

Patched versions

3.1.21
3.2.6

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.

References

@ioquatix ioquatix published to rack/rack Apr 1, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Apr 2, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 2, 2026
Reviewed Apr 2, 2026
Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(11th percentile)

Weaknesses

Interpretation Conflict

Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-32762

GHSA ID

GHSA-qfgr-crr9-7r49

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.