Semantic-release version 3.0.5, released on April 21, 2015, is a minor patch update to the automated semver-compliant package publishing tool, succeeding version 3.0.4 released on April 3rd, 2015. Both versions share the same core dependencies, including modules for handling configuration files (ini, abbrev, minimist), working with GitHub (github, github-url-from-git, parse-github-repo-url), managing semantic versioning (semver), making HTTP requests (request), and extracting Git information (git-head). They also leverage conventional-changelog for generating changelogs.
The notable difference between the two versions lies within the development dependencies. Version 3.0.5 upgrades the tape testing library from version 3.5.0 to version 4.0.0. This indicates a potential update or refactoring of the testing suite, likely to improve the reliability, maintainability, or coverage of the tests for semantic-release itself. Developers using semantic-release directly won't see a change as the dependencies are for the core team to test and improve the app, but this change reflects an effort to improve the quality of the package and its ecosystem. Both versions use the same toolset for testing, linting, and mocking.
All the vulnerabilities related to the version 3.0.5 of the package
Secret disclosure when containing characters that become URI encoded
Secrets that would normally be masked by semantic-release
can be accidentally disclosed if they contain characters that become encoded when included in a URL.
Fixed in v17.2.3
Secrets that do not contain characters that become encoded when included in a URL are already masked properly.
semver vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service
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.
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.
Prototype Pollution in lodash
Versions of lodash
before 4.17.12 are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function defaultsDeep
allows a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object
via {constructor: {prototype: {...}}}
causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
Update to version 4.17.12 or later.
Prototype Pollution in lodash
Versions of lodash
before 4.17.5 are vulnerable to prototype pollution.
The vulnerable functions are 'defaultsDeep', 'merge', and 'mergeWith' which allow a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object
via __proto__
causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
Update to version 4.17.5 or later.
Prototype Pollution in lodash
Versions of lodash
before 4.17.11 are vulnerable to prototype pollution.
The vulnerable functions are 'defaultsDeep', 'merge', and 'mergeWith' which allow a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object
via {constructor: {prototype: {...}}}
causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
Update to version 4.17.11 or later.
Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in lodash
lodash prior to 4.7.11 is affected by: CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption. The impact is: Denial of service. The component is: Date handler. The attack vector is: Attacker provides very long strings, which the library attempts to match using a regular expression. The fixed version is: 4.7.11.
Prototype Pollution in lodash
Versions of lodash prior to 4.17.19 are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The functions pick
, set
, setWith
, update
, updateWith
, and zipObjectDeep
allow a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object if the property identifiers are user-supplied. Being affected by this issue requires manipulating objects based on user-provided property values or arrays.
This vulnerability causes the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects and may lead to Denial of Service or Code Execution under specific circumstances.
Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in lodash
All versions of package lodash prior to 4.17.21 are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the toNumber
, trim
and trimEnd
functions.
Steps to reproduce (provided by reporter Liyuan Chen):
var lo = require('lodash');
function build_blank(n) {
var ret = "1"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += " "
}
return ret + "1";
}
var s = build_blank(50000) var time0 = Date.now();
lo.trim(s)
var time_cost0 = Date.now() - time0;
console.log("time_cost0: " + time_cost0);
var time1 = Date.now();
lo.toNumber(s) var time_cost1 = Date.now() - time1;
console.log("time_cost1: " + time_cost1);
var time2 = Date.now();
lo.trimEnd(s);
var time_cost2 = Date.now() - time2;
console.log("time_cost2: " + time_cost2);
Command Injection in lodash
lodash
versions prior to 4.17.21 are vulnerable to Command Injection via the template function.
Uncontrolled Resource Consumption in trim-newlines
@rkesters/gnuplot is an easy to use node module to draw charts using gnuplot and ps2pdf. The trim-newlines package before 3.0.1 and 4.x before 4.0.1 for Node.js has an issue related to regular expression denial-of-service (ReDoS) for the .end()
method.