CVE-2024-27316: Apache httpd HTTP/2 DoS and Azure Linux Attestation

The Apache HTTP Server vulnerability tracked as CVE-2024-27316 — an HTTP/2 denial-of-service triggered by an attacker sending endless CONTINUATION frames that cause memory exhaustion — is real, fixed upstream in the Apache httpd releases, and Microsoft’s brief advisory that “Azure Linux includes this open‑source library and is therefore potentially affected” is an accurate, product‑scoped inventory statement — but it is not a categorical guarantee that no other Microsoft product could include the same vulnerable component.

Background / Overview​

CVE-2024-27316 is an availability-focused flaw in Apache HTTP Server’s HTTP/2 handling: when a client sends header blocks that exceed an internal size limit, the server’s HTTP/2 stack (nghttp2-related parsing and buffering) may hold on to those header fragments while building a helpful HTTP 413 response. If a malicious client continues to send CONTINUATION frames without terminating the header block, the server can repeatedly buffer more data until it consumes available memory and crashes or becomes unresponsive. The upstream Apache advisory documents the bug, assigns the vulnerability to httpd versions through 2.4.58, and records that a fixed release was made in the 2.4.59/2.4.58 timeframe depending on the exact advisory note.
Independent vulnerability trackers and CERT authorities have described the same root cause — unbounded accumulation of HTTP/2 CONTINUATION frames leading to uncontrolled memory growth — and have consistently recommended upgrading affected httpd installations to the patched release. The vulnerability is assigned a high-impact availability score by industry scanners because no authentication is required and network access is sufficient to exploit the flaw in a hostile environment.

---

What Microsoft actually said (and what that wording means)​

Microsoft’s public CVE entries have, for a number of Linux/open-source CVEs, included the short FAQ line: “Is Azure Linux the only Microsoft product that includes this open‑source library and is therefore potentially affected?” followed by language that explains that Azure Linux images have been inventory‑checked and that Microsoft began publishing machine‑readable CSAF/VEX attestations as of October 2025, and that the company will update CVE/VEX mappings if additional Microsoft products are identified as carriers. That wording appears repeatedly in Microsoft’s Security Update Guide entries for many Linux-related CVEs and matches the phrasing you quoted.
Two points to draw from Microsoft’s phrasing:

• It is an authoritative attestation for the specific product named — in this case, Azure Linux. If MSRC says Azure Linux includes the implicated library, operators running Microsoft-published Azure Linux images should take that as a confirmed hit and take action (patch, mitigate, or roll forward to a fixed image).
• It is not a negative statement about the rest of Microsoft’s ecosystem. The phrasing does not assert that other Microsoft products, services, or artifacts cannot contain the same upstream component. It simply means Microsoft has completed the inventory and attestation work for Azure Linux and will expand the mapping if further carriers are found. Treat the statement as positive confirmation for Azure Linux and an inventory gap for other artifacts until additional attestations are published.

This intent — to publish product-scoped VEX/CSAF attestations and extend them over time — is a transparency improvement for customers, but it creates a common operational confusion: customers often read the single-line attestation as an exclusive statement instead of a scoped one. Microsoft’s wording is accurate but conservative by design: it communicates what has been checked, not what has been exhaustively checked across every product and artifact the company produces.

---

Short answer to the user’s question​

No — Azure Linux being listed is not definitive proof that it is the only Microsoft product that could include the vulnerable Apache HTTP Server library. Microsoft’s attestation means: “We have confirmed Azure Linux includes the affected component.” It does not prove absence in other Microsoft artifacts. Operators should treat other Microsoft-supplied images, containers, services, and binaries as unverified (and therefore potentially affected) until Microsoft publishes an explicit VEX/CSAF mapping or until the artifact is inspected.

---

Why the “only Azure Linux” interpretation is risky​

Many Microsoft cloud and developer artifacts build on, ship, or host Linux software in a variety of ways. Even if Microsoft teams have not yet published attestations for a specific CVE, the vulnerable open-source code can still be present in multiple places across Microsoft’s ecosystem:

• Azure Marketplace VM images and community images can include preinstalled Apache httpd packages or repackaged VM images that bundle Apache. Marketplace entries show that third-party images with Apache are available and distributed through Microsoft Azure Marketplace — those images are effectively delivered via Microsoft’s commercial platform even if the publisher is third-party.
• Azure platform services that run Linux-based workloads — for example, App Service on Linux, container hosts for App Service and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), and many managed containerized offerings — regularly run container images where customers (or Microsoft-managed images) might have included Apache httpd. Those containers and images are common carriers for open-source web servers. Operator environments that rely on Microsoft-hosted container images or base images should treat those artifacts as potential exposure vectors.
• Microsoft’s CI/CD and developer infrastructure — hosted build agents, pipeline runner images, and prebuilt toolchains — can be another place where Apache binaries appear (directly or inside containers used by build pipelines). While the exact inventory for each hosted runner varies over time, the architecture used by CI/CD platforms is such that open-source servers and libraries can get introduced through images or build dependencies. For example, marketplace VM images and cloud VM templates often provide preinstalled Apache, and containers used in pipelines likewise can include it.

Because of these distribution modes, restricting remediation to “only Azure Linux” creates the risk of blind spots: any Microsoft-supplied image or service that bundles Apache or includes an affected httpd binary could be vulnerable even if Microsoft hasn’t yet published a CSAF/VEX mapping for that product.

---

How to determine whether other Microsoft products you use are affected​

Operationally, defenders should assume that any Microsoft artifact which could plausibly carry an httpd installation should be verified. That includes virtual machine images, container base images, managed service runtime images, and CI/CD runner images. Below is a practical checklist you can follow.

Quick verification checklist (recommended immediate steps)​

• Inventory and prioritize Microsoft artifacts under your control:
• Microsoft-published VM marketplace images you use.
• Azure Linux images running on your VMs.
• Containers running on AKS or App Service that use Microsoft base images.
• CI/CD build agents, self-hosted or Microsoft-hosted, that run Linux images.
• Locate httpd installations or httpd-derived images:
• Run package queries in the image (e.g., check installed packages or container layers for “httpd”, “apache2”, or “apache”).
• Inspect image manifests and SBOMs where available.
• If you discover httpd binaries:
• Compare the installed httpd version against the Apache security advisory: affected 2.4.17 through 2.4.58 (patched in 2.4.59+) — upgrade or rebuild images accordingly.
• If you cannot perform an immediate inventory:
• Apply mitigations: disable HTTP/2 on exposed httpd endpoints until you can confirm the httpd version or apply the patch; apply connection and header size limits in front of upstream servers (WAF, reverse proxies); and enforce network-level rate limits and timeouts on client connections.
• Monitor Microsoft’s MSRC update and VEX/CSAF mappings for any expansion of the attested product list (Microsoft stated it will update CVE records when additional products are identified).

---

Technical remediation and mitigations (detailed)​

• Primary remediation: upgrade Apache HTTP Server to a fixed release. The Apache project’s advisory identifies the patched releases and the affected ranges; operators should update to the fixed release (2.4.59 or later, as noted by Apache) as soon as practical. Upgrade is the only fully reliable fix.
• Short-term mitigations if you cannot immediately patch:
• Disable HTTP/2 for affected services. If disabling is not possible, apply strict header and frame size limits and connection timeouts in any upstream proxies or load balancers to limit attacker ability to stream unlimited CONTINUATION frames.
• Use WAF rules to throttle or block suspicious HTTP/2 header behavior or excessively long header sequences.
• For container platforms: rebuild containers with patched httpd binaries and redeploy; remove images from registries or mark them as deprecated until rebuilt.
• Detection: look for anomalous incoming HTTP/2 streams that contain unusually long header sequences or persistent CONTINUATION frames without END_HEADERS, and track memory usage spikes correlated with such traffic patterns. Instrument processes with memory accounting and enable telemetry/alerts for processes that exceed expected memory thresholds.

---

How to interpret Microsoft’s VEX/CSAF roll‑out (what to expect next)​

Microsoft’s move to publish machine-readable VEX/CSAF attestations (announced as starting in October 2025 in their advisory language) is a constructive step toward supply-chain transparency. It means Microsoft will systematically say “this product includes this upstream component” or “this product does not include that upstream component” where inventory checks have been completed. In practice:

• Expect initial attestations to cover a small set of Microsoft-published artifacts (Azure Linux and closely related kernel builds / images).
• Over time, Microsoft aims to expand coverage; when it discovers additional Microsoft products that include the same upstream library, it will update the CVE entry and the CSAF/VEX data to reflect the broader scope. That is Microsoft’s explicit commitment in the MSRC FAQ language.
• Do not rely on the absence of an attestation as a proof of absence. Until Microsoft publishes a “not affected” declaration for a product or you independently verify, treat the artifact as unverified.

This model improves clarity for customers who run the attested product, but it places the onus on operators to actively verify their own Microsoft-supplied artifacts rather than passively assuming safety.

---

Concrete defensive playbook for enterprise operators​

• Triage and scope (Day 0–1)
• Search your cloud inventory for “apache”, “httpd”, “apache2” across images, VMs, registries, and container manifests.
• Prioritize externally exposed services and any Windows/Linux VMs using Microsoft-published images.
• Patch and rebuild (Day 1–7)
• Patch all discovered httpd installations to the fixed Apache release.
• Rebuild container images with patched httpd binaries, publish new tags, and redeploy.
• Compensating controls while patching (Day 0–7)
• If immediate patching is not possible, disable HTTP/2 or enforce strict frame/header limits via reverse proxies, WAFs, or LB settings.
• Apply connection/timeouts and per-connection memory limits where available.
• Detection and monitoring (ongoing)
• Add telemetry rules that alert on growing memory use by httpd processes, repeated long-lived HTTP/2 streams, and frequent CONTINUATION frames.
• Supply-chain hardening (weeks)
• Require SBOMs for all third-party marketplace images you consume.
• Vet marketplace publishers and prefer official distro images where possible.
• Make CSAF/VEX feeds part of your vulnerability triage pipeline so that when Microsoft expands attestation coverage you are alerted quickly.
• Engage Microsoft if necessary
• If you find Microsoft-supplied artifacts that appear vulnerable but not listed in MSRC attestations, open an MSRC support/ticket or file an inquiry asking for product mapping updates.

---

Strengths and limitations of Microsoft’s current approach​

• Strengths:
• The move to publish machine-readable VEX/CSAF attestations is an important step for enterprise customers who need deterministic inventory signals. It reduces ambiguity for products Microsoft has checked and speeds up remediation for those assets.
• Microsoft is explicit that it will update CVE records as additional products are identified, which is a positive operational commitment compared with organizations that provide no product mapping at all.
• Limitations and risks:
• The attestation model is reactive and scoped by product; initial coverage will naturally be partial. Customers that consume many Microsoft-provided artifacts should not equate “not listed” with “not affected.”
• Large ecosystems with mixed delivery models (marketplace images, partner images, container registries, CI/CD runners) create many places where the vulnerable component can be introduced. This complexity means that single-product attestations are necessary but not sufficient for comprehensive risk reduction.

---

Final assessment and recommended customer actions​

• Accept Microsoft’s attestation that Azure Linux includes the implicated library and treat that as a confirmed vulnerability for Azure Linux images — patch or migrate those images immediately.
• Do not assume exclusivity. Any Microsoft product that bundles or distributes Linux images, VM templates, base container images, or managed runtimes could — in principle — carry the Apache httpd versions that are vulnerable. Treat un‑attested Microsoft artifacts as unverified and follow the inventory checklist above.
• Operational steps for most organizations:
• Inventory and hunt for httpd binaries in your Microsoft-supplied artifacts and containers.
• Patch or rebuild vulnerable images to upgraded Apache releases (2.4.59+).
• Apply short-term mitigations (disable HTTP/2 or tighten header/frame/timeouts) where immediate patching is not feasible.
• Integrate MSRC CSAF/VEX feeds into your triage pipeline and subscribe to updates for CVE-2024-27316 so you learn when Microsoft expands product mappings.

---

Closing analysis: practical truth and the path forward​

Microsoft’s succinct CVE wording is helpful because it tells customers where the company has completed its inventory work — but the cloud era’s reality is that many different artifacts can carry the same open-source library. The defensible operational posture for any organization that uses Microsoft cloud or Microsoft-distributed artifacts is to verify not just the attested product but also every Microsoft artifact that could plausibly carry Apache httpd: marketplace VM images, container base images, managed runtimes, and build/CI images.
The Apache advisory and independent vulnerability databases are clear about the technical fix and the urgency: upgrade affected httpd deployments to the patched releases. Microsoft’s VEX/CSAF publishing program reduces ambiguity for Azure Linux customers and will get better over time; meanwhile, security teams must act on both the confirmed attestation (patch Azure Linux) and the reasonable inference that other Microsoft-supplied artifacts may remain unverified until explicitly attested or inspected.
If you need a short, prioritized checklist to hand to an operations team today:

• Patch every httpd instance you control to 2.4.59+.
• Search your Microsoft-published images and containers for “httpd” and rebuild any image that contains a vulnerable version.
• If you rely on Azure Linux images, apply Microsoft-patched images immediately and subscribe to MSRC/VEX updates for this CVE.

(For additional context and to validate these technical points in your environment, consult the Apache HTTP Server security advisory for CVE-2024-27316 and monitor Microsoft’s Security Update Guide and CSAF/VEX feeds for any expanded product mappings.)

---

Source: MSRC Security Update Guide - Microsoft Security Response Center