| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| 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. |
| Node.js 4.0.0, 4.1.0, and 4.1.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service. |
| The tar package before 2.0.0 for Node.js allows remote attackers to write to arbitrary files via a symlink attack in an archive. |
| 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 crc32_big function in crc32.c in zlib 1.2.8 might allow context-dependent attackers to have unspecified impact via vectors involving big-endian CRC calculation. |
| Node.js was affected by OpenSSL vulnerability CVE-2017-3737 in regards to the use of SSL_read() due to TLS handshake failure. The result was that an active network attacker could send application data to Node.js using the TLS or HTTP2 modules in a way that bypassed TLS authentication and encryption. |
| Node.js had a bug in versions 8.X and 9.X which caused buffers to not be initialized when the encoding for the fill value did not match the encoding specified. For example, 'Buffer.alloc(0x100, "This is not correctly encoded", "hex");' The buffer implementation was updated such that the buffer will be initialized to all zeros in these cases. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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 c-ares function `ares_parse_naptr_reply()`, which is used for parsing NAPTR responses, could be triggered to read memory outside of the given input buffer if the passed in DNS response packet was crafted in a particular way. |
