Jest-cli versions 0.4.9 and 0.4.10 are remarkably similar, indicating an incremental update likely focused on bug fixes or internal improvements. Both versions retain identical core functionalities, dependencies, and development dependencies, suggesting no significant API changes or new features were introduced. Developers relying on Jest for "Painless JavaScript Unit Testing" can expect a consistent experience when upgrading from 0.4.9 to 0.4.10. The shared dependencies, including testing staples like 'jasmine-pit' and 'istanbul' for coverage, ensure a familiar testing environment. The consistent versions of 'coffee-script' and 'lodash.template' maintain compatibility with existing workflows.
Key dependencies such as 'q', 'diff', 'jsdom', and 'resolve' remain untouched in both versions, preserving stability in core testing operations. The consistent development dependencies like 'jshint' and 'node-find-files' signal uniform linting and file management practices. Given the unchanged dependency profile, the primary reason to upgrade to 0.4.10 would likely involve addressing specific bugs or performance enhancements not explicitly detailed in the provided data. The release date difference of a few hours suggests a quick follow-up patch. Developers should consult the official Jest changelog or repository commit history for comprehensive details on the exact changes implemented in version 0.4.10 to determine if the update addresses any pressing issues affecting their projects.
All the vulnerabilities related to the version 0.4.10 of the package
Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)
A vulnerability was found in diff before v3.5.0, the affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attacks.
Regular Expression Denial of Service in underscore.string
Versions of underscore.string
prior to 3.3.5 are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS).
The function unescapeHTML
is vulnerable to ReDoS due to an overly-broad regex. The slowdown is approximately 2s for 50,000 characters but grows exponentially with larger inputs.
Upgrade to version 3.3.5 or higher.
Server-Side Request Forgery in Request
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.
form-data uses unsafe random function in form-data for choosing boundary
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:
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.
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 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).
For an application to be vulnerable, it must:
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)If an application is vulnerable, this allows an attacker to make arbitrary requests to internal systems.
tough-cookie Prototype Pollution vulnerability
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.
Regular Expression Denial of Service
A Regular Expression vulnerability was found in nwmatcher before 1.4.4. The fix replacing multiple repeated instances of the "\s*" pattern.
Regular Expression Denial of Service in minimatch
Affected versions of minimatch
are vulnerable to regular expression denial of service attacks when user input is passed into the pattern
argument of minimatch(path, pattern)
.
var minimatch = require(“minimatch”);
// utility function for generating long strings
var genstr = function (len, chr) {
var result = “”;
for (i=0; i<=len; i++) {
result = result + chr;
}
return result;
}
var exploit = “[!” + genstr(1000000, “\\”) + “A”;
// minimatch exploit.
console.log(“starting minimatch”);
minimatch(“foo”, exploit);
console.log(“finishing minimatch”);
Update to version 3.0.2 or later.
minimatch ReDoS vulnerability
A vulnerability was found in the minimatch package. This flaw allows a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when calling the braceExpand function with specific arguments, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Prototype Pollution in minimist
Affected versions of minimist
are vulnerable to prototype pollution. Arguments are not properly sanitized, allowing an attacker to modify the prototype of Object
, causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
Parsing the argument --__proto__.y=Polluted
adds a y
property with value Polluted
to all objects. The argument --__proto__=Polluted
raises and uncaught error and crashes the application.
This is exploitable if attackers have control over the arguments being passed to minimist
.
Upgrade to versions 0.2.1, 1.2.3 or later.
Prototype Pollution in minimist
Minimist prior to 1.2.6 and 0.2.4 is vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via file index.js
, function setKey()
(lines 69-95).
Command Injection in lodash
lodash
versions prior to 4.17.21 are vulnerable to Command Injection via the template function.