This project might be open to known security vulnerabilities, which can be prevented by tightening the version range of affected dependencies. Find detailed information at the bottom.

Crate h3

Dependencies

(7 total, 2 possibly insecure)

CrateRequiredLatestStatus
 bytes ⚠️^11.11.1maybe insecure
 fastrand^2.0.12.3.0up to date
 futures-util^0.30.3.32up to date
 http^11.4.0up to date
 pin-project-lite^0.20.2.17up to date
 tokio ⚠️^11.50.0maybe insecure
 tracing^0.1.400.1.44up to date

Dev dependencies

(11 total, 1 outdated, 4 possibly insecure)

CrateRequiredLatestStatus
 assert_matches^1.5.01.5.0up to date
 futures^0.3.280.3.32up to date
 futures-util^0.30.3.32up to date
 proptest^11.10.0up to date
 quinn^0.110.11.9up to date
 quinn-proto ⚠️^0.110.11.14maybe insecure
 rcgen^0.130.14.7out of date
 rustls ⚠️^0.230.23.37maybe insecure
 tokio ⚠️^11.50.0maybe insecure
 tokio-util^0.7.90.7.18up to date
 tracing-subscriber ⚠️^0.30.3.23maybe insecure

Security Vulnerabilities

tokio: reject_remote_clients Configuration corruption

RUSTSEC-2023-0001

On Windows, configuring a named pipe server with pipe_mode will force ServerOptions::reject_remote_clients as false.

This drops any intended explicit configuration for the reject_remote_clients that may have been set as true previously.

The default setting of reject_remote_clients is normally true meaning the default is also overridden as false.

Workarounds

Ensure that pipe_mode is set first after initializing a ServerOptions. For example:

let mut opts = ServerOptions::new();
opts.pipe_mode(PipeMode::Message);
opts.reject_remote_clients(true);

rustls: rustls network-reachable panic in `Acceptor::accept`

RUSTSEC-2024-0399

A bug introduced in rustls 0.23.13 leads to a panic if the received TLS ClientHello is fragmented. Only servers that use rustls::server::Acceptor::accept() are affected.

Servers that use tokio-rustls's LazyConfigAcceptor API are affected.

Servers that use tokio-rustls's TlsAcceptor API are not affected.

Servers that use rustls-ffi's rustls_acceptor_accept API are affected.

tracing-subscriber: Logging user input may result in poisoning logs with ANSI escape sequences

RUSTSEC-2025-0055

Previous versions of tracing-subscriber were vulnerable to ANSI escape sequence injection attacks. Untrusted user input containing ANSI escape sequences could be injected into terminal output when logged, potentially allowing attackers to:

  • Manipulate terminal title bars
  • Clear screens or modify terminal display
  • Potentially mislead users through terminal manipulation

In isolation, impact is minimal, however security issues have been found in terminal emulators that enabled an attacker to use ANSI escape sequences via logs to exploit vulnerabilities in the terminal emulator.

This was patched in PR #3368 to escape ANSI control characters from user input.

bytes: Integer overflow in `BytesMut::reserve`

RUSTSEC-2026-0007

In the unique reclaim path of BytesMut::reserve, the condition

if v_capacity >= new_cap + offset

uses an unchecked addition. When new_cap + offset overflows usize in release builds, this condition may incorrectly pass, causing self.cap to be set to a value that exceeds the actual allocated capacity. Subsequent APIs such as spare_capacity_mut() then trust this corrupted cap value and may create out-of-bounds slices, leading to UB.

This behavior is observable in release builds (integer overflow wraps), whereas debug builds panic due to overflow checks.

PoC

use bytes::*;

fn main() {
    let mut a = BytesMut::from(&b"hello world"[..]);
    let mut b = a.split_off(5);

    // Ensure b becomes the unique owner of the backing storage
    drop(a);

    // Trigger overflow in new_cap + offset inside reserve
    b.reserve(usize::MAX - 6);

    // This call relies on the corrupted cap and may cause UB & HBO
    b.put_u8(b'h');
}

Workarounds

Users of BytesMut::reserve are only affected if integer overflow checks are configured to wrap. When integer overflow is configured to panic, this issue does not apply.

quinn-proto: Denial of service in Quinn endpoints

RUSTSEC-2026-0037

Receiving QUIC transport parameters containing invalid values could lead to a panic.

Unfortunately the maintainers did not properly assess usage of unwrap() calls in the transport parameters parsing code, and we did not have sufficient fuzzing coverage to find this issue. We have since added a fuzzing target to cover this code path.