WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕Vendor nodejs✕
Overview 18 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 6 public PoC · 6 EPSS ≥ 0.5
18matches 0in Waratek scope0.0% 0protected0.0% 0exploited0.0% 0CISA KEV0.0% 6public PoC33.3% 6EPSS ≥ 0.533.3%
Protected by Waratek 0 0.0% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 0 0.0% Outside Waratek scope 4 22.2% Not applicable 14 77.8% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 3 16.7% High 6 33.3% Medium 8 44.4% Low 1 5.6% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 0 0.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 18 100.0% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%
Exploited 0 0.0% Working exploit published 0 0.0% Proof of concept only 18 100.0% Forecast only 0 0.0% No public exploit 0 0.0%
split by peak 8 / year
Not applicable: 14Outside Waratek scope: 4 Low: 1Medium: 8High: 6Critical: 3 not blocked: 18 Proof of concept only: 18
20161 Outside Waratek scope1 High1 not blocked1 Proof of concept only1 20170 20180 20190 20202 Outside Waratek scope1 Not applicable1 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 Proof of concept only2 20211 Outside Waratek scope1 Medium1 not blocked1 Proof of concept only1 20228 Outside Waratek scope1 Not applicable7 Critical1 High3 Medium4 not blocked8 Proof of concept only8 20233 Not applicable3 High1 Medium2 not blocked3 Proof of concept only3 20242 Not applicable2 Critical1 Low1 not blocked2 Proof of concept only2 20250 20261 Not applicable1 Critical1 not blocked1 Proof of concept only1
20162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
18 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2026-1525 Critical 2026-03-12 Not applicable Proof of concept only Undici allows duplicate HTTP Content-Length headers when they are provided in an array with case-variant names (e.g., Content-Length and content-length). This produces malformed HTTP/1.1 requests with multiple conflicting Content-Length values on the wire. Who is impacted: * Applications using undici.request(), undici.Client, or similar low-level APIs with headers passed as flat arrays * Applications that accept user-controlled header names without case-normalization Potential consequences: * Denial of Service: Strict HTTP parsers (proxies, servers) will reject requests with duplicate Content-Length headers (400 Bad Request) * HTTP Request Smuggling: In deployments where an intermediary and backend interpret duplicate headers inconsistently (e.g., one uses the first value, the other uses the last), this can enable request smuggling attacks leading to ACL bypass, cache poisoning, or credential hijacking
CVE-2024-3566 Critical 2024-04-10 Not applicable Proof of concept only A command inject vulnerability allows an attacker to perform command injection on Windows applications that indirectly depend on the CreateProcess function when the specific conditions are satisfied.
CVE-2024-30261 Low 2024-04-04 Not applicable Proof of concept only Undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js. An attacker can alter the `integrity` option passed to `fetch()`, allowing `fetch()` to accept requests as valid even if they have been tampered. This vulnerability was patched in version(s) 5.28.4 and 6.11.1.
CVE-2023-32005 Medium 2023-09-12 Not applicable Proof of concept only A vulnerability has been identified in Node.js version 20, affecting users of the experimental permission model when the --allow-fs-read flag is used with a non-* argument. This flaw arises from an inadequate permission model that fails to restrict file stats through the `fs.statfs` API. As a result, malicious actors can retrieve stats from files that they do not have explicit read access to. This vulnerability affects all users using the experimental permission model in Node.js 20. Please note that at the time this CVE was issued, the permission model is an experimental feature of Node.js.
CVE-2023-23919 High 2023-02-23 Not applicable Proof of concept only A cryptographic vulnerability exists in Node.js <19.2.0, <18.14.1, <16.19.1, <14.21.3 that in some cases did does not clear the OpenSSL error stack after operations that may set it. This may lead to false positive errors during subsequent cryptographic operations that happen to be on the same thread. This in turn could be used to cause a denial of service.
CVE-2023-23936 Medium 2023-02-16 Not applicable Proof of concept only Undici is an HTTP/1.1 client for Node.js. Starting with version 2.0.0 and prior to version 5.19.1, the undici library does not protect `host` HTTP header from CRLF injection vulnerabilities. This issue is patched in Undici v5.19.1. As a workaround, sanitize the `headers.host` string before passing to undici.
CVE-2022-35256 Medium 2022-12-05 Not applicable Proof of concept only The llhttp parser in the http module in Node v18.7.0 does not correctly handle header fields that are not terminated with CLRF. This may result in HTTP Request Smuggling.
CVE-2022-3786 High 2022-11-01 Not applicable Proof of concept only A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed a malicious certificate or for an application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address in a certificate to overflow an arbitrary number of bytes containing the `.' character (decimal 46) on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service). In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects.
CVE-2022-3602 High 2022-11-01 Not applicable Proof of concept only A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed the malicious certificate or for the application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address to overflow four attacker-controlled bytes on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service) or potentially remote code execution. Many platforms implement stack overflow protections which would mitigate against the risk of remote code execution. The risk may be further mitigated based on stack layout for any given platform/compiler. Pre-announcements of CVE-2022-3602 described this issue as CRITICAL. Further analysis based on some of the mitigating factors described above have led this to be downgraded to HIGH. Users are still encouraged to upgrade to a new version as soon as possible. In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.7 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3,3.0.4,3.0.5,3.0.6).
CVE-2022-35948 Medium 2022-08-15 Not applicable Proof of concept only 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.
CVE-2022-35949 Critical 2022-08-12 Not applicable Proof of concept only 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.
CVE-2022-31151 Medium 2022-07-21 Not applicable Proof of concept only 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).
CVE-2022-31150 Medium 2022-07-19 Not applicable Proof of concept only 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.
CVE-2022-0778 High 2022-03-15 Outside Waratek scope Proof of concept only 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).
CVE-2021-3449 Medium 2021-03-25 Outside Waratek scope Proof of concept only An OpenSSL TLS server may crash if sent a maliciously crafted renegotiation ClientHello message from a client. If a TLSv1.2 renegotiation ClientHello omits the signature_algorithms extension (where it was present in the initial ClientHello), but includes a signature_algorithms_cert extension then a NULL pointer dereference will result, leading to a crash and a denial of service attack. A server is only vulnerable if it has TLSv1.2 and renegotiation enabled (which is the default configuration). OpenSSL TLS clients are not impacted by this issue. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 versions are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1k. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not impacted by this issue. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1k (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1j).
CVE-2020-1971 Medium 2020-12-08 Outside Waratek scope Proof of concept only 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-2020-8277 High 2020-11-19 Not applicable Proof of concept only A Node.js application that allows an attacker to trigger a DNS request for a host of their choice could trigger a Denial of Service in versions < 15.2.1, < 14.15.1, and < 12.19.1 by getting the application to resolve a DNS record with a larger number of responses. This is fixed in 15.2.1, 14.15.1, and 12.19.1.
CVE-2016-2183 High 2016-09-01 Outside Waratek scope Proof of concept only 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.