Filtered by vendor Nodejs
Subscriptions
Total
250 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-48935 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 3.3 Low |
| A flaw in Node.js Permission API can cause a file metadata to be modified even on a path that was set as read-only with e.g. `--allow-fs-read`. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48619 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 7.5 High |
| A flaw in Node.js HTTP/2 client allows a server to send an unlimited number of ORIGIN frames, which could lead to an Out of Memory error on the client. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48930 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 9.8 Critical |
| A flaw in Node.js TLS hostname handling can cause Embedded-nul hostnames can lead to silent authority rebinding due to c-string truncation in resolver bindings. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48928 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 5.4 Medium |
| A inconsistency in Node.js hostname matching can cause a trust-policy bypass in multi-context mTLS setups. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48936 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 3.3 Low |
| A flaw in Node.js Permission API can cause a local server to be started (via a Unix domain socket), even without the `--allow-net` permission. This vulnerability affects one supported release line: **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48615 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-26 | 7.5 High |
| A flaw in Node.js proxy tunnel error handling could expose proxy credentials in `ERR_PROXY_TUNNEL` error messages. When proxy credentials are embedded in the proxy URL, they may be exposed through error handling paths and captured by logs, diagnostics, or other error consumers. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48617 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Nodejs | 2026-06-24 | N/A |
| A flaw in Node.js Permission Model enforcement allows Bypass via `process.report.writeReport()` Path Misvalidation. This can lead to confidentiality impact or bypass of the intended security boundary under affected configurations. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48937 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Nodejs | 2026-06-24 | N/A |
| A flaw in Node.js HTTP/2 server API can cause servers to keep accepting data even after sending a `GOAWAY` frame. This vulnerability affects two supported release lines: **Node.js 22** and **Node.js 24**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48931 | 1 Nodejs | 2 Node.js, Nodejs | 2026-06-24 | 3.7 Low |
| A flaw in Node.js HTTP Agent can cause a client to accept as valid a response that is send before the client has sent the request. This vulnerability affects all supported release lines: **Node.js 22**, **Node.js 24**, and **Node.js 26**. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9679 | 2 Nodejs, Undici | 2 Undici, Undici | 2026-06-23 | 5.9 Medium |
| Impact: undici's cookie parser in parseSetCookie percent-decodes cookie values via qsUnescape, turning encoded sequences like %0D%0A, %00, %3B, and %3D into their literal byte equivalents. RFC 6265 §5.4 does not specify any decoding and browsers do not decode either. Applications that parse a Set-Cookie header and then forward the parsed value into a response header (proxies, middleware, SSR frameworks) become vulnerable to HTTP response header injection: an attacker-controlled upstream can inject arbitrary Set-Cookie, Location, or Cache-Control headers into the application's downstream response, enabling session fixation, open redirect, or cache poisoning. Affected applications are those that use undici's cookie parsing (parseSetCookie, parseCookie, getSetCookies) and forward the parsed cookie value into a response header. This was introduced in undici 7.0.0 via PR #3789. Patches: Upgrade to undici v6.26.0, v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: If upgrade is not immediately possible, do not forward values returned by parseSetCookie/parseCookie/getSetCookies directly into response headers; sanitize the value first to strip or reject CR, LF, NUL, ;, and = bytes. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9697 | 3 Nodejs, Redhat, Undici | 3 Undici, Hummingbird, Undici | 2026-06-23 | 7.4 High |
| Impact: undici's ProxyAgent silently drops the requestTls option when configured with a SOCKS5 proxy URI (socks5:// or socks://). The target HTTPS connection through the SOCKS5 tunnel falls back to Node's default trust store, ignoring user-configured ca, cert, key, rejectUnauthorized, and servername settings. Applications that pin to an internal or corporate CA via requestTls.ca will, when their proxy URI is SOCKS5, get the default Mozilla CA bundle as the trust anchor instead. Any cert signed by any publicly-trusted CA for the target hostname is accepted, breaking the intended pin and enabling MITM read and tamper of the HTTPS exchange. Affected applications are those that use undici's ProxyAgent (or Socks5ProxyAgent directly) with SOCKS5 AND rely on requestTls for TLS scope restriction. The bug was introduced in undici 7.23.0 when SOCKS5 support was added. Patches: Upgrade to undici v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: No workaround is available within the SOCKS5 path. If a SOCKS5 proxy with TLS scope restriction is required and an upgrade is not yet possible, route the traffic through an HTTP-proxy ProxyAgent instead, where requestTls is honored correctly. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9675 | 3 Nodejs, Redhat, Undici | 3 Undici, Hummingbird, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 7.5 High |
| Impact: The undici WebSocket client enforces maxPayloadSize per-frame but does not enforce the cumulative size of fragmented uncompressed messages. A malicious WebSocket server can stream many small fragments that each pass per-frame validation but collectively exceed the configured limit, causing unbounded memory growth in the client process. The result is memory exhaustion and a denial of service. Affected applications are those using the undici WebSocket client (new WebSocket(...)) that can be induced to connect to an attacker-controlled or compromised WebSocket endpoint. This is a regression specific to undici 8.1.0. The 6.25.0 line shipped the equivalent cumulative check from the start and is unaffected. The 7.x line never had the maxPayloadSize feature and is also unaffected. Patches: Upgrade to undici >= 8.5.0. Workarounds: No workaround is available. The fix must be applied through an upgrade. | ||||
| CVE-2026-6734 | 3 Nodejs, Redhat, Undici | 3 Undici, Hummingbird, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 7.5 High |
| Impact: When using Socks5ProxyAgent, undici reuses a single connection pool across different origins without verifying that the pool's origin matches the requested origin. All requests are dispatched through the pool connected to the first origin, regardless of the intended destination. This causes cross-origin request routing: credentials and request data intended for origin B are sent to origin A, responses from the wrong origin are trusted, and HTTPS requests may be silently downgraded to HTTP. Impacted users are applications that use Socks5ProxyAgent (directly or via setGlobalDispatcher) and make requests to more than one origin. This was introduced in undici 7.23.0 via PR #4385 and affects all versions through 8.1.0. Patches: Upgrade to undici v7.26.0 or v8.2.0. Workarounds: Use a separate Socks5ProxyAgent instance per origin, or avoid using Socks5ProxyAgent with multiple origins. | ||||
| CVE-2026-6733 | 2 Nodejs, Undici | 2 Undici, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 3.7 Low |
| Impact: Undici's HTTP/1.1 client is vulnerable to response queue poisoning on reused keep-alive sockets. An attacker-controlled upstream server can inject an unsolicited HTTP/1.1 response onto an idle socket after a request completes. When the client dispatches the next request on that socket, it associates the injected response with the new request, causing responses to be delivered to the wrong requests. This requires an attacker-controlled or compromised upstream HTTP/1.1 server and keep-alive connection reuse. Patches: Upgrade to undici v6.26.0, v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: Disable keep-alive connection reuse by setting keepAliveTimeout: 0 on the Client or Pool. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9678 | 3 Nodejs, Redhat, Undici | 3 Undici, Hummingbird, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 5.9 Medium |
| Impact: Undici's cache interceptor incorrectly classifies some responses as cacheable when the upstream Cache-Control header uses whitespace-padded qualified private or no-cache field names such as private=" authorization" or no-cache="\tauthorization". The parser preserves the surrounding whitespace, so later comparisons against the literal authorization field name fail and the response is stored. In shared-cache mode, this allows a response containing one user's authenticated data to be served from cache to a subsequent caller, including an unauthenticated caller, when both requests resolve to the same cache key. Affected applications are those that explicitly enable the cache interceptor (interceptors.cache()) in shared mode, forward Authorization headers upstream, and receive cacheable responses with non-canonical qualified private or no-cache directives. Patches: Upgrade to undici v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: If upgrade is not immediately possible, disable shared-cache mode for traffic that includes Authorization headers, avoid caching responses to authenticated requests, or add Vary: Authorization upstream. | ||||
| CVE-2026-11525 | 2 Nodejs, Undici | 2 Undici, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 3.7 Low |
| Impact: When undici parses a Set-Cookie header, it accepts any SameSite attribute value that contains Strict, Lax, or None as a substring, rather than the case-insensitive exact match specified by RFC 6265. Non-spec values are silently mapped to one of the three standard tokens. For example, SameSite=NoneOfYourBusiness is parsed as None (the most permissive setting), and SameSite=StrictLax is parsed as Lax (a downgrade from Strict). Affected applications are those that consume Set-Cookie headers from server responses (for example via undici's fetch or proxy code paths) and then forward or rely on the parsed sameSite attribute. A malicious or non-compliant server can coerce the consumer's view of a cookie's SameSite policy to a weaker value, silently degrading the SameSite enforcement the cookie is supposed to provide. This was introduced in undici 5.15.0 when the cookies feature was added. Patches: Upgrade to undici v6.26.0, v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: After parsing a Set-Cookie header, validate that the resulting sameSite attribute is one of 'Strict', 'Lax', or 'None' (exact, case-insensitive) before forwarding or relying on it. | ||||
| CVE-2026-12151 | 2 Nodejs, Undici | 2 Undici, Undici | 2026-06-18 | 7.5 High |
| Impact: The undici WebSocket client enforces maxPayloadSize on the cumulative byte count of fragments in a message but does not enforce a limit on the number of fragments. A malicious WebSocket server can stream many small or empty continuation frames that each pass per-frame and cumulative-size validation, collectively causing unbounded memory growth in the client process. The result is memory exhaustion and a denial of service. Affected applications are those using the undici WebSocket client (new WebSocket(...)) or the WebSocketStream API that can be induced to connect to an attacker-controlled or compromised WebSocket endpoint. All releases starting at undici 6.17.0 are affected. Patches: Upgrade to undici >= 6.26.0, >= 7.28.0, or >= 8.5.0. Workarounds: No workaround is available. The fix must be applied through an upgrade. | ||||
| CVE-2016-2183 | 6 Cisco, Nodejs, Openssl and 3 more | 14 Content Security Management Appliance, Node.js, Openssl and 11 more | 2026-05-29 | 7.5 High |
| The DES and Triple DES ciphers, as used in the TLS, SSH, and IPSec protocols and other protocols and products, have a birthday bound of approximately four billion blocks, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, as demonstrated by an HTTPS session using Triple DES in CBC mode, aka a "Sweet32" attack. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1971 | 9 Debian, Fedoraproject, Netapp and 6 more | 55 Debian Linux, Fedora, Active Iq Unified Manager and 52 more | 2026-05-29 | 5.9 Medium |
| The X.509 GeneralName type is a generic type for representing different types of names. One of those name types is known as EDIPartyName. OpenSSL provides a function GENERAL_NAME_cmp which compares different instances of a GENERAL_NAME to see if they are equal or not. This function behaves incorrectly when both GENERAL_NAMEs contain an EDIPARTYNAME. A NULL pointer dereference and a crash may occur leading to a possible denial of service attack. OpenSSL itself uses the GENERAL_NAME_cmp function for two purposes: 1) Comparing CRL distribution point names between an available CRL and a CRL distribution point embedded in an X509 certificate 2) When verifying that a timestamp response token signer matches the timestamp authority name (exposed via the API functions TS_RESP_verify_response and TS_RESP_verify_token) If an attacker can control both items being compared then that attacker could trigger a crash. For example if the attacker can trick a client or server into checking a malicious certificate against a malicious CRL then this may occur. Note that some applications automatically download CRLs based on a URL embedded in a certificate. This checking happens prior to the signatures on the certificate and CRL being verified. OpenSSL's s_server, s_client and verify tools have support for the "-crl_download" option which implements automatic CRL downloading and this attack has been demonstrated to work against those tools. Note that an unrelated bug means that affected versions of OpenSSL cannot parse or construct correct encodings of EDIPARTYNAME. However it is possible to construct a malformed EDIPARTYNAME that OpenSSL's parser will accept and hence trigger this attack. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 versions are affected by this issue. Other OpenSSL releases are out of support and have not been checked. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1i (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1h). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2x (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2w). | ||||
| CVE-2022-0778 | 8 Debian, Fedoraproject, Mariadb and 5 more | 25 Debian Linux, Fedora, Mariadb and 22 more | 2026-05-22 | 7.5 High |
| 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). | ||||