| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A OS Command Injection vulnerability exists in Node.js versions <14.21.1, <16.18.1, <18.12.1, <19.0.1 due to an insufficient IsAllowedHost check that can easily be bypassed because IsIPAddress does not properly check if an IP address is invalid before making DBS requests allowing rebinding attacks.The fix for this issue in https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2022-32212 was incomplete and this new CVE is to complete the fix. |
| A weak randomness in WebCrypto keygen vulnerability exists in Node.js 18 due to a change with EntropySource() in SecretKeyGenTraits::DoKeyGen() in src/crypto/crypto_keygen.cc. There are two problems with this: 1) It does not check the return value, it assumes EntropySource() always succeeds, but it can (and sometimes will) fail. 2) The random data returned byEntropySource() may not be cryptographically strong and therefore not suitable as keying material. |
| Next.js is a React framework that can provide building blocks to create web applications. All of the following must be true to be affected by this CVE: Next.js version 12.2.3, Node.js version above v15.0.0 being used with strict `unhandledRejection` exiting AND using next start or a [custom server](https://nextjs.org/docs/advanced-features/custom-server). Deployments on Vercel ([vercel.com](https://vercel.com/)) are not affected along with similar environments where `next-server` isn't being shared across requests. |
| undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js. It is possible to inject CRLF sequences into request headers in undici in versions less than 5.7.1. A fix was released in version 5.8.0. Sanitizing all HTTP headers from untrusted sources to eliminate `\r\n` is a workaround for this issue. |
| Authorization headers are cleared on cross-origin redirect. However, cookie headers which are sensitive headers and are official headers found in the spec, remain uncleared. There are active users using cookie headers in undici. This may lead to accidental leakage of cookie to a 3rd-party site or a malicious attacker who can control the redirection target (ie. an open redirector) to leak the cookie to the 3rd party site. This was patched in v5.7.1. By default, this vulnerability is not exploitable. Do not enable redirections, i.e. `maxRedirections: 0` (the default). |
| undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js.`undici` is vulnerable to SSRF (Server-side Request Forgery) when an application takes in **user input** into the `path/pathname` option of `undici.request`. If a user specifies a URL such as `http://127.0.0.1` or `//127.0.0.1` ```js const undici = require("undici") undici.request({origin: "http://example.com", pathname: "//127.0.0.1"}) ``` Instead of processing the request as `http://example.org//127.0.0.1` (or `http://example.org/http://127.0.0.1` when `http://127.0.0.1 is used`), it actually processes the request as `http://127.0.0.1/` and sends it to `http://127.0.0.1`. If a developer passes in user input into `path` parameter of `undici.request`, it can result in an _SSRF_ as they will assume that the hostname cannot change, when in actual fact it can change because the specified path parameter is combined with the base URL. This issue was fixed in `undici@5.8.1`. The best workaround is to validate user input before passing it to the `undici.request` call. |
| undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js.`=< undici@5.8.0` users are vulnerable to _CRLF Injection_ on headers when using unsanitized input as request headers, more specifically, inside the `content-type` header. Example: ``` import { request } from 'undici' const unsanitizedContentTypeInput = 'application/json\r\n\r\nGET /foo2 HTTP/1.1' await request('http://localhost:3000, { method: 'GET', headers: { 'content-type': unsanitizedContentTypeInput }, }) ``` The above snippet will perform two requests in a single `request` API call: 1) `http://localhost:3000/` 2) `http://localhost:3000/foo2` This issue was patched in Undici v5.8.1. Sanitize input when sending content-type headers using user input as a workaround. |
| There is a carry propagating bug in the x86_64 Montgomery squaring procedure in OpenSSL 1.0.2 before 1.0.2k and 1.1.0 before 1.1.0d. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA and DSA as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH are considered just feasible (although very difficult) because most of the work necessary to deduce information about a private key may be performed offline. The amount of resources required for such an attack would be very significant and likely only accessible to a limited number of attackers. An attacker would additionally need online access to an unpatched system using the target private key in a scenario with persistent DH parameters and a private key that is shared between multiple clients. For example this can occur by default in OpenSSL DHE based SSL/TLS ciphersuites. Note: This issue is very similar to CVE-2015-3193 but must be treated as a separate problem. |
| There is a carry propagating bug in the Broadwell-specific Montgomery multiplication procedure in OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 before 1.1.0c that handles input lengths divisible by, but longer than 256 bits. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA, DSA and DH private keys are impossible. This is because the subroutine in question is not used in operations with the private key itself and an input of the attacker's direct choice. Otherwise the bug can manifest itself as transient authentication and key negotiation failures or reproducible erroneous outcome of public-key operations with specially crafted input. Among EC algorithms only Brainpool P-512 curves are affected and one presumably can attack ECDH key negotiation. Impact was not analyzed in detail, because pre-requisites for attack are considered unlikely. Namely multiple clients have to choose the curve in question and the server has to share the private key among them, neither of which is default behaviour. Even then only clients that chose the curve will be affected. |
| Node.js 8.5.0 before 8.6.0 allows remote attackers to access unintended files, because a change to ".." handling was incompatible with the pathname validation used by unspecified community modules. |
| inffast.c in zlib 1.2.8 might allow context-dependent attackers to have unspecified impact by leveraging improper pointer arithmetic. |
| The inflateMark function in inflate.c in zlib 1.2.8 might allow context-dependent attackers to have unspecified impact via vectors involving left shifts of negative integers. |
| The validator module before 1.1.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to bypass the cross-site scripting (XSS) filter via nested forbidden strings. |
| node 0.3.2 and URONode before 1.0.5r3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (bandwidth consumption). |
| The validator module before 1.1.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to bypass the cross-site scripting (XSS) filter via vectors related to UI redressing. |
| The validator module before 1.1.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to bypass the cross-site scripting (XSS) filter via a crafted javascript URI. |
| The validator module before 1.1.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to bypass the XSS filter via a nested tag. |
| If an SSL/TLS server or client is running on a 32-bit host, and a specific cipher is being used, then a truncated packet can cause that server or client to perform an out-of-bounds read, usually resulting in a crash. For OpenSSL 1.1.0, the crash can be triggered when using CHACHA20/POLY1305; users should upgrade to 1.1.0d. For Openssl 1.0.2, the crash can be triggered when using RC4-MD5; users who have not disabled that algorithm should update to 1.0.2k. |
| The validator package before 2.0.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to bypass the cross-site scripting (XSS) filter via hex-encoded characters. |
| Directory traversal vulnerability in the st module before 0.2.5 for Node.js allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a %2e%2e (encoded dot dot) in an unspecified path. |