Version Details and Security Vulnerabilities

Grunt prior to version 1.5.2 is vulnerable to path traversal.

The package grunt before 1.3.0 are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Execution due to the default usage of the function load() instead of its secure replacement safeLoad() of the package js-yaml inside grunt.file.readYAML.

file.copy operations in GruntJS are vulnerable to a TOCTOU race condition leading to arbitrary file write in GitHub repository gruntjs/grunt prior to 1.5.3. This vulnerability is capable of arbitrary file writes which can lead to local privilege escalation to the GruntJS user if a lower-privileged user has write access to both source and destination directories as the lower-privileged user can create a symlink to the GruntJS user's .bashrc file or replace /etc/shadow file if the GruntJS user is root.

Affected versions of timespan are vulnerable to a regular expression denial of service when parsing dates.

The amplification for this vulnerability is significant, with 50,000 characters resulting in the event loop being blocked for around 10 seconds.

Recommendation

No direct patch is available for this vulnerability.

Currently, the best available solution is to use a functionally equivalent alternative package.

It is also sufficient to ensure that user input is not being passed into timespan, or that the maximum length of such user input is drastically reduced. Limiting the input length to 150 characters should be sufficient in most cases.

Versions of the package semver before 7.5.2 on the 7.x branch, before 6.3.1 on the 6.x branch, and all other versions before 5.7.2 are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the function new Range, when untrusted user data is provided as a range.

Versions 4.3.1 and earlier of semver are affected by a regular expression denial of service vulnerability when extremely long version strings are parsed.

Recommendation

Update to version 4.3.2 or later

The request package through 2.88.2 for Node.js and the @cypress/request package prior to 3.0.0 allow a bypass of SSRF mitigations via an attacker-controller server that does a cross-protocol redirect (HTTP to HTTPS, or HTTPS to HTTP).

NOTE: The request package is no longer supported by the maintainer.

Summary

form-data uses Math.random() to select a boundary value for multipart form-encoded data. This can lead to a security issue if an attacker:

1. can observe other values produced by Math.random in the target application, and
2. can control one field of a request made using form-data

Because the values of Math.random() are pseudo-random and predictable (see: https://blog.securityevaluators.com/hacking-the-javascript-lottery-80cc437e3b7f), an attacker who can observe a few sequential values can determine the state of the PRNG and predict future values, includes those used to generate form-data's boundary value. The allows the attacker to craft a value that contains a boundary value, allowing them to inject additional parameters into the request.

This is largely the same vulnerability as was recently found in undici by parrot409 -- I'm not affiliated with that researcher but want to give credit where credit is due! My PoC is largely based on their work.

Details

The culprit is this line here: https://github.com/form-data/form-data/blob/426ba9ac440f95d1998dac9a5cd8d738043b048f/lib/form_data.js#L347

An attacker who is able to predict the output of Math.random() can predict this boundary value, and craft a payload that contains the boundary value, followed by another, fully attacker-controlled field. This is roughly equivalent to any sort of improper escaping vulnerability, with the caveat that the attacker must find a way to observe other Math.random() values generated by the application to solve for the state of the PRNG. However, Math.random() is used in all sorts of places that might be visible to an attacker (including by form-data itself, if the attacker can arrange for the vulnerable application to make a request to an attacker-controlled server using form-data, such as a user-controlled webhook -- the attacker could observe the boundary values from those requests to observe the Math.random() outputs). A common example would be a x-request-id header added by the server. These sorts of headers are often used for distributed tracing, to correlate errors across the frontend and backend. Math.random() is a fine place to get these sorts of IDs (in fact, opentelemetry uses Math.random for this purpose)

PoC

PoC here: https://github.com/benweissmann/CVE-2025-7783-poc

Instructions are in that repo. It's based on the PoC from https://hackerone.com/reports/2913312 but simplified somewhat; the vulnerable application has a more direct side-channel from which to observe Math.random() values (a separate endpoint that happens to include a randomly-generated request ID).

Impact

For an application to be vulnerable, it must:

• Use form-data to send data including user-controlled data to some other system. The attacker must be able to do something malicious by adding extra parameters (that were not intended to be user-controlled) to this request. Depending on the target system's handling of repeated parameters, the attacker might be able to overwrite values in addition to appending values (some multipart form handlers deal with repeats by overwriting values instead of representing them as an array)
• Reveal values of Math.random(). It's easiest if the attacker can observe multiple sequential values, but more complex math could recover the PRNG state to some degree of confidence with non-sequential values.

If an application is vulnerable, this allows an attacker to make arbitrary requests to internal systems.

Versions of the package tough-cookie before 4.1.3 are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to improper handling of Cookies when using CookieJar in rejectPublicSuffixes=false mode. This issue arises from the manner in which the objects are initialized.

Affected versions of mime are vulnerable to regular expression denial of service when a mime lookup is performed on untrusted user input.

Recommendation

Update to version 2.0.3 or later.

Versions of ws prior to 1.0.1 are affected by a remote memory disclosure vulnerability.

In certain rare circumstances, applications which allow users to control the arguments of a client.ping() call will cause ws to send the contents of an allocated but non-zero-filled buffer to the server. This may disclose sensitive information that still exists in memory after previous use of the memory for other tasks.

Proof of Concept

var ws = require('ws')

var server = new ws.Server({ port: 9000 })
var client = new ws('ws://localhost:9000')

client.on('open', function () {
  console.log('open')
  client.ping(50) // this sends a non-zeroed buffer of 50 bytes

  client.on('pong', function (data) {
    console.log('got pong')
    console.log(data) // Data from the client. 
  })
})

Recommendation

Update to version 1.0.1 or greater.

Affected versions of ws can crash when a specially crafted Sec-WebSocket-Extensions header containing Object.prototype property names as extension or parameter names is sent.

Proof of concept

const WebSocket = require('ws');
const net = require('net');

const wss = new WebSocket.Server({ port: 3000 }, function () {
  const payload = 'constructor';  // or ',;constructor'

  const request = [
    'GET / HTTP/1.1',
    'Connection: Upgrade',
    'Sec-WebSocket-Key: test',
    'Sec-WebSocket-Version: 8',
    `Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: ${payload}`,
    'Upgrade: websocket',
    '\r\n'
  ].join('\r\n');

  const socket = net.connect(3000, function () {
    socket.resume();
    socket.write(request);
  });
});

Recommendation

Update to version 3.3.1 or later.

Affected versions of ws do not appropriately limit the size of incoming websocket payloads, which may result in a denial of service condition when the node process crashes after receiving a large payload.

Recommendation

Update to version 1.1.1 or later. Alternatively, set the maxpayload option for the ws server to a value smaller than 256MB.

Connect is a stack of middleware that is executed in order in each request.

The "methodOverride" middleware allows the http post to override the method of the request with the value of the "_method" post key or with the header "x-http-method-override".

Because the user post input was not checked, req.method could contain any kind of value. Because the req.method did not match any common method VERB, connect answered with a 404 page containing the "Cannot [method] [url]" content. The method was not properly encoded for output in the browser.

###Example:

~ curl "localhost:3000" -d "_method=<script src=http://nodesecurity.io/xss.js></script>"
Cannot <SCRIPT SRC=HTTP://NODESECURITY.IO/XSS.JS></SCRIPT> /

Recommendation

Update to the newest version of Connect or disable methodOverride. It is not possible to avoid the vulnerability if you have enabled this middleware in the top of your stack.

node-connect before 2.8.2 has cross site scripting in Sencha Labs Connect middleware (vulnerability due to incomplete fix for CVE-2013-7370)

Overview

Connect is a stack of middleware that is executed in order in each request.

The "methodOverride" middleware allows the http post to override the method of the request with the value of the "_method" post key or with the header "x-http-method-override".

Because the user post input was not checked, req.method could contain any kind of value. Because the req.method did not match any common method VERB, connect answered with a 404 page containing the "Cannot [method] [url]" content. The method was not properly encoded for output in the browser.

Example:

~ curl "localhost:3000" -d "_method=<script src=http://nodesecurity.io/xss.js></script>"
Cannot <SCRIPT SRC=HTTP://NODESECURITY.IO/XSS.JS></SCRIPT> /

Recommendation

Update to the newest version of Connect or disable methodOverride. It is not possible to avoid the vulnerability if you have enabled this middleware in the top of your stack.

Credit:

Sergio Arcos

connect node module before 2.14.0 suffers from a Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability due to a lack of validation of file in directory.js middleware.

Versions of uglify-js prior to 2.4.24 are affected by a vulnerability which may cause crafted JavaScript to have altered functionality after minification.

Recommendation

Upgrade UglifyJS to version >= 2.4.24.

Versions of uglify-js prior to 2.6.0 are affected by a regular expression denial of service vulnerability when malicious inputs are passed into the parse() method.

Proof of Concept

var u = require('uglify-js');
var genstr = function (len, chr) {
    var result = "";
    for (i=0; i<=len; i++) {
        result = result + chr;
    }

    return result;
}

u.parse("var a = " + genstr(process.argv[2], "1") + ".1ee7;");

Results

$ time node test.js 10000
real	0m1.091s
user	0m1.047s
sys	0m0.039s

$ time node test.js 80000
real	0m6.486s
user	0m6.229s
sys	0m0.094s

Recommendation

Update to version 2.6.0 or later.