| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed a malicious certificate or for an application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address in a certificate to overflow an arbitrary number of bytes containing the `.' character (decimal 46) on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service). In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects.
|
| A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed the malicious certificate or for the application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address to overflow four attacker-controlled bytes on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service) or potentially remote code execution. Many platforms implement stack overflow protections which would mitigate against the risk of remote code execution. The risk may be further mitigated based on stack layout for any given platform/compiler. Pre-announcements of CVE-2022-3602 described this issue as CRITICAL. Further analysis based on some of the mitigating factors described above have led this to be downgraded to HIGH. Users are still encouraged to upgrade to a new version as soon as possible. In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.7 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3,3.0.4,3.0.5,3.0.6). |
| The BN_mod_sqrt() function, which computes a modular square root, contains a bug that can cause it to loop forever for non-prime moduli. Internally this function is used when parsing certificates that contain elliptic curve public keys in compressed form or explicit elliptic curve parameters with a base point encoded in compressed form. It is possible to trigger the infinite loop by crafting a certificate that has invalid explicit curve parameters. Since certificate parsing happens prior to verification of the certificate signature, any process that parses an externally supplied certificate may thus be subject to a denial of service attack. The infinite loop can also be reached when parsing crafted private keys as they can contain explicit elliptic curve parameters. Thus vulnerable situations include: - TLS clients consuming server certificates - TLS servers consuming client certificates - Hosting providers taking certificates or private keys from customers - Certificate authorities parsing certification requests from subscribers - Anything else which parses ASN.1 elliptic curve parameters Also any other applications that use the BN_mod_sqrt() where the attacker can control the parameter values are vulnerable to this DoS issue. In the OpenSSL 1.0.2 version the public key is not parsed during initial parsing of the certificate which makes it slightly harder to trigger the infinite loop. However any operation which requires the public key from the certificate will trigger the infinite loop. In particular the attacker can use a self-signed certificate to trigger the loop during verification of the certificate signature. This issue affects OpenSSL versions 1.0.2, 1.1.1 and 3.0. It was addressed in the releases of 1.1.1n and 3.0.2 on the 15th March 2022. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.2 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1n (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1m). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2zd (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2zc). |
| A flaw in Node.js URL processing causes an assertion failure in native code when `url.format()` is called with a malformed internationalized domain name (IDN) containing invalid characters, crashing the Node.js process. |
| A flaw in Node.js HMAC verification uses a non-constant-time comparison when validating user-provided signatures, potentially leaking timing information proportional to the number of matching bytes. Under certain threat models where high-resolution timing measurements are possible, this behavior could be exploited as a timing oracle to infer HMAC values.
Node.js already provides timing-safe comparison primitives used elsewhere in the codebase, indicating this is an oversight rather than an intentional design decision.
This vulnerability affects **20.x, 22.x, 24.x, and 25.x**. |
| A flaw in V8's string hashing mechanism causes integer-like strings to be hashed to their numeric value, making hash collisions trivially predictable. By crafting a request that causes many such collisions in V8's internal string table, an attacker can significantly degrade performance of the Node.js process.
The most common trigger is any endpoint that calls `JSON.parse()` on attacker-controlled input, as JSON parsing automatically internalizes short strings into the affected hash table.
This vulnerability affects **20.x, 22.x, 24.x, and 25.x**. |
| A flaw in Node.js Permission Model filesystem enforcement leaves `fs.realpathSync.native()` without the required read permission checks, while all comparable filesystem functions correctly enforce them.
As a result, code running under `--permission` with restricted `--allow-fs-read` can still use `fs.realpathSync.native()` to check file existence, resolve symlink targets, and enumerate filesystem paths outside of permitted directories.
This vulnerability affects **20.x, 22.x, 24.x, and 25.x** processes using the Permission Model where `--allow-fs-read` is intentionally restricted. |
| A memory leak occurs in Node.js HTTP/2 servers when a client sends WINDOW_UPDATE frames on stream 0 (connection-level) that cause the flow control window to exceed the maximum value of 2³¹-1. The server correctly sends a GOAWAY frame, but the Http2Session object is never cleaned up.
This vulnerability affects HTTP2 users on Node.js 20, 22, 24 and 25. |
| A flaw in Node.js Permission Model network enforcement leaves Unix Domain Socket (UDS) server operations without the required permission checks, while all comparable network paths correctly enforce them.
As a result, code running under `--permission` without `--allow-net` can create and expose local IPC endpoints, allowing communication with other processes on the same host outside of the intended network restriction boundary.
This vulnerability affects Node.js **25.x** processes using the Permission Model where `--allow-net` is intentionally omitted to restrict network access. Note that `--allow-net` is currently an experimental feature. |
| An incomplete fix for CVE-2024-36137 leaves `FileHandle.chmod()` and `FileHandle.chown()` in the promises API without the required permission checks, while their callback-based equivalents (`fs.fchmod()`, `fs.fchown()`) were correctly patched.
As a result, code running under `--permission` with restricted `--allow-fs-write` can still use promise-based `FileHandle` methods to modify file permissions and ownership on already-open file descriptors, bypassing the intended write restrictions.
This vulnerability affects **20.x, 22.x, 24.x, and 25.x** processes using the Permission Model where `--allow-fs-write` is intentionally restricted. |
| A flaw in Node.js HTTP request handling causes an uncaught `TypeError` when a request is received with a header named `__proto__` and the application accesses `req.headersDistinct`.
When this occurs, `dest["__proto__"]` resolves to `Object.prototype` rather than `undefined`, causing `.push()` to be called on a non-array. This exception is thrown synchronously inside a property getter and cannot be intercepted by `error` event listeners, meaning it cannot be handled without wrapping every `req.headersDistinct` access in a `try/catch`.
* This vulnerability affects all Node.js HTTP servers on **20.x, 22.x, 24.x, and v25.x** |
| Undici allows duplicate HTTP Content-Length headers when they are provided in an array with case-variant names (e.g., Content-Length and content-length). This produces malformed HTTP/1.1 requests with multiple conflicting Content-Length values on the wire.
Who is impacted:
* Applications using undici.request(), undici.Client, or similar low-level APIs with headers passed as flat arrays
* Applications that accept user-controlled header names without case-normalization
Potential consequences:
* Denial of Service: Strict HTTP parsers (proxies, servers) will reject requests with duplicate Content-Length headers (400 Bad Request)
* HTTP Request Smuggling: In deployments where an intermediary and backend interpret duplicate headers inconsistently (e.g., one uses the first value, the other uses the last), this can enable request smuggling attacks leading to ACL bypass, cache poisoning, or credential hijacking |
| The undici WebSocket client is vulnerable to a denial-of-service attack via unbounded memory consumption during permessage-deflate decompression. When a WebSocket connection negotiates the permessage-deflate extension, the client decompresses incoming compressed frames without enforcing any limit on the decompressed data size. A malicious WebSocket server can send a small compressed frame (a "decompression bomb") that expands to an extremely large size in memory, causing the Node.js process to exhaust available memory and crash or become unresponsive.
The vulnerability exists in the PerMessageDeflate.decompress() method, which accumulates all decompressed chunks in memory and concatenates them into a single Buffer without checking whether the total size exceeds a safe threshold. |
| This is an uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability (CWE-400) that can lead to Denial of Service (DoS).
In vulnerable Undici versions, when interceptors.deduplicate() is enabled, response data for deduplicated requests could be accumulated in memory for downstream handlers. An attacker-controlled or untrusted upstream endpoint can exploit this with large/chunked responses and concurrent identical requests, causing high memory usage and potential OOM process termination.
Impacted users are applications that use Undici’s deduplication interceptor against endpoints that may produce large or long-lived response bodies.
PatchesThe issue has been patched by changing deduplication behavior to stream response chunks to downstream handlers as they arrive (instead of full-body accumulation), and by preventing late deduplication when body streaming has already started.
Users should upgrade to the first official Undici (and Node.js, where applicable) releases that include this patch. |
| ImpactWhen an application passes user-controlled input to the upgrade option of client.request(), an attacker can inject CRLF sequences (\r\n) to:
* Inject arbitrary HTTP headers
* Terminate the HTTP request prematurely and smuggle raw data to non-HTTP services (Redis, Memcached, Elasticsearch)
The vulnerability exists because undici writes the upgrade value directly to the socket without validating for invalid header characters:
// lib/dispatcher/client-h1.js:1121
if (upgrade) {
header += `connection: upgrade\r\nupgrade: ${upgrade}\r\n`
} |
| ImpactA server can reply with a WebSocket frame using the 64-bit length form and an extremely large length. undici's ByteParser overflows internal math, ends up in an invalid state, and throws a fatal TypeError that terminates the process.
Patches
Patched in the undici version v7.24.0 and v6.24.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. |
| ImpactThe undici WebSocket client is vulnerable to a denial-of-service attack due to improper validation of the server_max_window_bits parameter in the permessage-deflate extension. When a WebSocket client connects to a server, it automatically advertises support for permessage-deflate compression. A malicious server can respond with an out-of-range server_max_window_bits value (outside zlib's valid range of 8-15). When the server subsequently sends a compressed frame, the client attempts to create a zlib InflateRaw instance with the invalid windowBits value, causing a synchronous RangeError exception that is not caught, resulting in immediate process termination.
The vulnerability exists because:
* The isValidClientWindowBits() function only validates that the value contains ASCII digits, not that it falls within the valid range 8-15
* The createInflateRaw() call is not wrapped in a try-catch block
* The resulting exception propagates up through the call stack and crashes the Node.js process |
| A flaw in Node.js's buffer allocation logic can expose uninitialized memory when allocations are interrupted, when using the `vm` module with the timeout option. Under specific timing conditions, buffers allocated with `Buffer.alloc` and other `TypedArray` instances like `Uint8Array` may contain leftover data from previous operations, allowing in-process secrets like tokens or passwords to leak or causing data corruption. While exploitation typically requires precise timing or in-process code execution, it can become remotely exploitable when untrusted input influences workload and timeouts, leading to potential confidentiality and integrity impact. |
| A flaw in Node.js’s Permissions model allows attackers to bypass `--allow-fs-read` and `--allow-fs-write` restrictions using crafted relative symlink paths. By chaining directories and symlinks, a script granted access only to the current directory can escape the allowed path and read sensitive files. This breaks the expected isolation guarantees and enables arbitrary file read/write, leading to potential system compromise.
This vulnerability affects users of the permission model on Node.js v20, v22, v24, and v25. |
| Undici is an HTTP/1.1 client for Node.js. Prior to versions 5.29.0, 6.21.2, and 7.5.0, applications that use undici to implement a webhook-like system are vulnerable. If the attacker set up a server with an invalid certificate, and they can force the application to call the webhook repeatedly, then they can cause a memory leak. This has been patched in versions 5.29.0, 6.21.2, and 7.5.0. As a workaound, avoid calling a webhook repeatedly if the webhook fails. |
