Skip to content

net-imap vulnerable to denial of service via high iteration count for `SCRAM-*` authentication

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 24, 2026 in ruby/net-imap • Updated May 14, 2026

Package

bundler net-imap (RubyGems)

Affected versions

>= 0.6.0, <= 0.6.3
>= 0.5.0, <= 0.5.13
>= 0.4.0, <= 0.4.23

Patched versions

0.6.4
0.5.14
0.4.24

Description

Summary

When authenticating a connection with SCRAM-SHA1 or SCRAM-SHA256, a hostile server can perform a computational denial-of-service attack on the client process by sending a big iteration count value.

Details

A hostile IMAP server can send an arbitrarily large PBKDF2 iteration count in the SCRAM server-first-message, causing the client to perform an expensive OpenSSL::KDF.pbkdf2_hmac call. Because the PBKDF2 function is a blocking C extension and holds onto Ruby’s Global VM Lock, it can freeze the entire Ruby VM for the duration of the computation.

OpenSSL enforces an effective maximum by using a 32-bit signed integer for the iteration count, Depending on hardware capabilities and OpenSSL version, this iteration count may be sufficient for to block all Ruby threads in the process for over seven minutes.

This is listed as one of the "Security Considerations", in RFC 7804:

A hostile server can perform a computational denial-of-service attack on clients by sending a big iteration count value. In order to defend against that, a client implementation can pick a maximum iteration count that it is willing to use and reject any values that exceed that threshold (in such cases, the client, of course, has to fail the authentication).

Impact

During SCRAM authentication to a hostile server, the entire Ruby VM will be locked for the duration of the computation. Depending on hardware capabilities and OpenSSL version, this may take many minutes.

OpenSSL::KDF.pbkdf2_hmac is a blocking C function, so Timeout cannot be used to guard against this. And it retains the Global VM lock, so other ruby threads will also be unable to run.

Mitigation

  • Upgrade to a patched version of net-imap that adds the max_iterations option to the SASL-* authenticators, and call Net::IMAP#authenticate with a max_iterations keyword argument.

    NOTE: The default max_iterations is 2³¹ - 1, the maximum signed 32 bit integer, the maximum allowed by OpenSSL.
    To prevent a denial of service attack, this must be set to a safe value, depending on hardware and version of OpenSSL.
    It is the user's responsibility to enforce minimum and maximum iteration counts that are appropriate for their security context.

  • Alternatively, avoid SCRAM-* mechanisms when authenticating to untrusted servers.

References

@nevans nevans published to ruby/net-imap Apr 24, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 4, 2026
Reviewed May 4, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 9, 2026
Last updated May 14, 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 v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction Passive
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA: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.
(14th percentile)

Weaknesses

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

Use of Blocking Code in Single-threaded, Non-blocking Context

The product uses a non-blocking model that relies on a single threaded process for features such as scalability, but it contains code that can block when it is invoked. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-42256

GHSA ID

GHSA-87pf-fpwv-p7m7

Source code

Credits

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