Restsharp
CVE-2024-45302
HIGH
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A05:2025 - Injection
ASVS 5.0
V1 - Encoding and Sanitization CRLF sequence sanitization
|
| Impact | CVSS score of 7.8 (HIGH). Attack characteristics: local attack vector, low complexity, no privileges required, user interaction required. Public proof-of-concept exploit code is available. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | Successful exploitation could compromise the high-severity affected system. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAI
RestSharp is a Simple REST and HTTP API Client for .NET. Rated high severity (CVSS 7.8), this vulnerability is no authentication required, low attack complexity. Public exploit code available.
RemediationAI
A vendor patch is available. Apply the latest security update as soon as possible. Apply vendor patches when available. Implement network segmentation and monitoring as interim mitigations.
Affected Packages
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)
Affects your stack
Affects 1 package in nuget
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
This vulnerability is classified under CWE-93. RestSharp is a Simple REST and HTTP API Client for .NET. The second argument to RestRequest.AddHeader (the header value) is vulnerable to CRLF injection. The same applies to RestRequest.AddOrUpdateHeader and RestClient.AddDefaultHeader. The way HTTP headers are added to a request is via the HttpHeaders.TryAddWithoutValidation method which does not check for CRLF characters in the header value. This means that any headers from a RestSharp.RequestHeaders object are added to the request in such a way that they are vulnerable to CRLF-injection. In general, CRLF-injection into a HTTP header (when using HTTP/1.1) means that one can inject additional HTTP headers or smuggle whole HTTP requests. If an application using the RestSharp library passes a user-controllable value through to a header, then that application becomes vulnerable to CRLF-injection. This is not necessarily a security issue for a command line application like the one above, but if such code were present in a web application then it becomes vulnerable to request splitting (as shown in the PoC) and thus Server Side Request Forgery. Strictly speaking this is a potential vulnerability in applications using RestSharp, not in RestSharp itself, but I would argue that at the very least there needs to be a warning about this behaviour in the RestSharp documentation. RestSharp has addressed this issue in version 112.0.0. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability. Affected products include: Restsharp. Version information: version 112.0.0..
Know when Restsharp gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Primary rating from NVD · only source for this CVE.
CVSS VectorNVD
DescriptionNVD
RestSharp is a Simple REST and HTTP API Client for .NET. The second argument to RestRequest.AddHeader (the header value) is vulnerable to CRLF injection. The same applies to RestRequest.AddOrUpdateHeader and RestClient.AddDefaultHeader. The way HTTP headers are added to a request is via the HttpHeaders.TryAddWithoutValidation method which does not check for CRLF characters in the header value. This means that any headers from a RestSharp.RequestHeaders object are added to the request in such a way that they are vulnerable to CRLF-injection. In general, CRLF-injection into a HTTP header (when using HTTP/1.1) means that one can inject additional HTTP headers or smuggle whole HTTP requests. If an application using the RestSharp library passes a user-controllable value through to a header, then that application becomes vulnerable to CRLF-injection. This is not necessarily a security issue for a command line application like the one above, but if such code were present in a web application then it becomes vulnerable to request splitting (as shown in the PoC) and thus Server Side Request Forgery. Strictly speaking this is a potential vulnerability in applications using RestSharp, not in RestSharp itself, but I would argue that at the very least there needs to be a warning about this behaviour in the RestSharp documentation. RestSharp has addressed this issue in version 112.0.0. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
Threat Intelligence Overview
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
GitHub
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
Server-Side Request Forgery exploits applications that fetch remote resources based on user-supplied URLs.
Exploit-DB