GHSA-6chq-wfr3-2hj9 CVE-2026-42035
Axios: Header Injection via Prototype Pollution
- Severity
- 7.4 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.40%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 34.53% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-113 Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')
- CWE-1321 Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution')
- Fix
1.15.1- Upgrade axios to this version or later
Description
Summary
A prototype pollution gadget exists in the Axios HTTP adapter (lib/adapters/http.js) that allows an attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP headers into outgoing requests. The vulnerability exploits duck-type checking of the data payload, where if Object.prototype is polluted with getHeaders, append, pipe, on, once, and Symbol.toStringTag, Axios misidentifies any plain object payload as a FormData instance and calls the attacker-controlled getHeaders() function, merging the returned headers into the outgoing request.
The vulnerable code resides exclusively in lib/adapters/http.js. The prototype pollution source does not need to originate from Axios itself — any prototype pollution primitive in any dependency in the application's dependency tree is sufficient to trigger this gadget.
Prerequisites:
A prototype pollution primitive must exist somewhere in the application's dependency chain (e.g., via lodash.merge, qs, JSON5, or any deep-merge utility processing attacker-controlled input). The pollution source is not required to be in Axios. The application must use Axios to make HTTP requests with a data payload (POST, PUT, PATCH).
Details
The vulnerability is in lib/adapters/http.js, in the data serialization pipeline:
// lib/adapters/http.js
} else if (utils.isFormData(data) && utils.isFunction(data.getHeaders)) {
headers.set(data.getHeaders());
// ...
}
Axios uses two sequential duck-type checks, both of which can be satisfied via prototype pollution:
1. utils.isFormData(data) — lib/utils.js
const isFormData = (thing) => {
let kind;
return thing && (
(typeof FormData === 'function' && thing instanceof FormData) || (
isFunction(thing.append) && (
(kind = kindOf(thing)) === 'formdata' ||
(kind === 'object' && isFunction(thing.toString) && thing.toString() === '[object FormData]')
)
)
)
}
2. utils.isFunction(data.getHeaders) — Duck-type for form-data npm package
// Returns true if Object.prototype.getHeaders is a function
utils.isFunction(data.getHeaders)
PoC
// Simulate Prototype Pollution
Object.prototype[Symbol.toStringTag] = 'FormData';
Object.prototype.append = () => {};
Object.prototype.getHeaders = () => {
const headers = Object.create(null);
(.... Introduce here all the headers you want ....)
return headers;
};
Object.prototype.pipe = function(d) { if(d&&d.end)d.end(); return d; };
Object.prototype.on = function() { return this; };
Object.prototype.once = function() { return this; };
// Legitimate application code
const response = await axios.post('https://internal-api.company.com/admin/delete',
{ userId: 42 },
{ headers: { 'Authorization': 'Bearer VALID_USER_TOKEN' } }
);
Impact
- Authentication Bypass (CVSS: C:H)
- Session Fixation (CVSS: I:H)
- Privilege Escalation (CVSS: C:H, I:H)
- IP Spoofing / WAF Bypass (CVSS: I:H)
Note on Scope: There is an argument to promote this from S:U to S:C (Scope: Changed), which would raise the score to 10.0. In some architectures, Axios is commonly used for service to service communication where downstream services trust identity headers (Authorization, X-Role, X-User-ID, X-Tenant-ID) forwarded from upstream API gateways. In this scenario, the vulnerable component (Axios in Service A) and the impacted component (Service B, which acts on the injected identity) are under different security authorities. The injected headers cross a trust boundary, meaning the impact extends beyond the security scope of the vulnerable component, the CVSS v3.1 definition of a Scope Change. We conservatively score S:U here, but maintainers should evaluate which one applies better here.
Recommended Fix
Add an explicit own-property check in lib/adapters/http.js:
- } else if (utils.isFormData(data) && utils.isFunction(data.getHeaders)) {
- headers.set(data.getHeaders());
+ } else if (utils.isFormData(data) && utils.isFunction(data.getHeaders) &&
+ Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(data, 'getHeaders')) {
+ headers.set(data.getHeaders());
Affected versions
npm
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
axios npm → 1.15.1
- npm
npm install axios@1.15.1- yarn
yarn add axios@1.15.1- pnpm
pnpm add axios@1.15.1
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 7.4
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-113: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')
The product receives data from an HTTP agent/component (e.g., web server, proxy, browser, etc.), but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CR and LF characters before the data is included in outgoing HTTP headers.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Construct HTTP headers very carefully, avoiding the use of non-validated input data.
- Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. If an input does not strictly conform to specifications, reject it or transform it into something that conforms. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- Implementation: Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
- Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.
CWE-1321: Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution')
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies attributes that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control modifications of attributes of the object prototype.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: By freezing the object prototype first (for example, Object.freeze(Object.prototype)), modification of the prototype becomes impossible.
- Architecture and Design: By blocking modifications of attributes that resolve to object prototype, such as proto or prototype, this weakness can be mitigated.
- Implementation: When handling untrusted objects, validating using a schema can be used.
- Implementation: By using an object without prototypes (via Object.create(null) ), adding object prototype attributes by accessing the prototype via the special attributes becomes impossible, mitigating this weakness.
- Implementation: Map can be used instead of objects in most cases. If Map methods are used instead of object attributes, it is not possible to access the object prototype or modify it.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-44g4-m2mj-wpvx Axios: CIDR-form NO_PROXY entries are ignored, causing proxy exclusion bypass for internal IP ranges | Medium | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-x97p-jq2g-jp4f Axios: Prototype Pollution Gadget in axios toFormData Options | High | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-vh66-26gq-q6x8 Axios: Prototype pollution gadget in fetch adapter can alter outbound requests | Medium | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-r4gj-5m52-g5wh Axios: maxRedirects: 0 is not enforced by the fetch adapter, allowing redirect-based SSRF | High | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-mghh-pgcx-3jjj Axios: ReDoS (O(N²)) in shouldBypassProxy host normalization, reachable via untrusted redirect Location | High | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-m8m8-qj5v-23w3 Axios: Node HTTP adapter prototype-pollution gadget allows request socket hijack via inherited createConnection | High | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-j8rh-479h-cp32 Axios: Header Injection via Inherited headers After Minimal Interceptor | Medium | Also affects axios |
| GHSA-c29m-xwm3-cm6r Axios: ReDoS in fromDataURI data: URL parser freezes the Node event loop (DoS) | High | Also affects axios |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor