GHSA-7pw4-f3q4-r2p2 CVE-2026-59727
Astro: Cross-site scripting via unescaped transition:* directive values on hydrated islands
- Severity
- 2.1 / 10
- Low · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.39%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 33.52% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
- CWE-83 Improper Neutralization of Script in Attributes in a Web Page
- CWE-116 Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output
- Fix
7.0.4- Upgrade astro to this version or later
Description
Summary
When a transition:persist, transition:scope, or transition:persist-props directive is applied to a client-hydrated (client:*) component, Astro copied the directive value onto the rendered <astro-island> element without HTML-escaping it. If a developer reflects attacker-controlled input into one of these directives, an attacker can break out of the attribute and inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript into the server-rendered output, resulting in reflected cross-site scripting (XSS).
Severity
Although a generic reflected XSS scores in the Medium range, exploitation here requires the application developer to have written a non-idiomatic pattern — passing untrusted, request-derived input directly into a transition directive. Astro applications that do not route untrusted input into these directives are unaffected. This mitigating precondition places the real-world severity at Low.
Details
In generateHydrateScript() (packages/astro/src/runtime/server/hydration.ts), every island property is HTML-escaped before serialization — the attrs, props, and opts assignments all pass through escapeHTML(). The transition directives, however, were copied verbatim:
transitionDirectivesToCopyOnIsland.forEach((name) => {
if (typeof props[name] !== 'undefined') {
island.props[name] = props[name]; // not escaped
}
});
The <astro-island> element is serialized via renderElement('astro-island', island, false) with shouldEscape=false, and toAttributeString() returns the value unchanged in that mode. As a result there is no downstream re-escaping, and the raw directive value reaches the HTML response. This is the same output sink previously addressed for slot names in GHSA-8hv8-536x-4wqp.
The affected directives are:
data-astro-transition-scope(transition:scope)data-astro-transition-persist(transition:persist)data-astro-transition-persist-props(transition:persist-props)
Note that transition:persist is typed boolean | string, so passing a string value is a supported use of the API.
Proof of Concept
A component that reflects a query parameter into a transition directive:
---
const persist = Astro.url.searchParams.get('persist') ?? 'default';
---
<Island client:load transition:persist={persist} />
Request:
https://example.com/?persist="><img src=x onerror=alert(document.domain)>
Rendered output (before the fix):
<astro-island … data-astro-transition-persist=""><img src=x onerror=alert(document.domain)>></astro-island>
The " closes the attribute and the injected <img onerror=…> executes in the victim's browser.
Impact
Reflected XSS. An attacker who can induce a victim to visit a crafted URL can execute arbitrary script in the victim's session on the origin, subject to the requirement that the target application reflects untrusted input into one of the affected transition directives.
Affected Versions
astro >= 3.10.0, < 7.0.4 (introduced in 3.10.0, PR #7861).
Patched Versions
astro >= 7.0.4. Fixed in PR #17212 by HTML-escaping transition directive values before they are rendered onto the island element.
Workarounds
Do not pass untrusted or request-derived input into transition:persist, transition:scope, or transition:persist-props. If such input is required, HTML-escape or strictly validate it before passing it to the directive. Upgrading to astro@7.0.4 or later removes the need for manual mitigation.
Credits
Reported by @jlgore.
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.
astro npm → 7.0.4
- npm
npm install astro@7.0.4- yarn
yarn add astro@7.0.4- pnpm
pnpm add astro@7.0.4
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 2.1
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Active
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- None
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- Low
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- Low
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
Weakness
CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
- Implementation, Architecture and Design: Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies. For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters. Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the: HTML body Element attributes (such as src="XYZ") URIs JavaScript sections Cascading Style Sheets and style property etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body. Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
- 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: If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
- 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. The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
- Implementation: With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
- Implementation: To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
- 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. When dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended. Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most ef
- Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
- Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
- Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
CWE-83: Improper Neutralization of Script in Attributes in a Web Page
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes "javascript:" or other URIs from dangerous attributes within tags, such as onmouseover, onload, onerror, or style.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Carefully check each input parameter against a rigorous positive specification (allowlist) defining the specific characters and format allowed. All input should be neutralized, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including tag attributes, hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. We often encounter data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended.
- 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. The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
- Implementation: With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
- Implementation: To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
CWE-116: Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output
The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode outputs in a manner less prone to error. Alternately, use built-in functions, but consider using wrappers in case those functions are discovered to have a vulnerability.
- Architecture and Design: If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated. For example, stored procedures can enforce database query structure and reduce the likelihood of SQL injection.
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies.
- Architecture and Design: In some cases, input validation may be an important strategy when output encoding is not a complete solution. For example, you may be providing the same output that will be processed by multiple consumers that use different encodings or representations. In other cases, you may be required to allow user-supplied input to contain control information, such as limited HTML tags that support formatting in a wiki or bulletin board. When this type of requirement must be met, use an extremely strict allowlist to limit which control sequences can be used. Verify that the resulting syntactic structure is what you expect. Use your normal encoding methods for the remainder of the input.
- Architecture and Design: Use input validation as a defense-in-depth measure to reduce the likelihood of output encoding errors (see CWE-20).
- Requirements: Fully specify which encodings are required by components that will be communicating with each other.
- Implementation: When exchanging data between components, ensure that both components are using the same character encoding. Ensure that the proper encoding is applied at each interface. Explicitly set the encoding you are using whenever the protocol allows you to do so.
References
Advisories
Fixes and patches
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-98hj-9722-w3j8 Astro: Reflected/Stored XSS via unescaped <script>/<style> tag content in JSX/MDX rendering | Medium | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-mpr7-6m5w-76rw Astro: Arbitrary CSS injection in Astro View Transitions | Low | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-26w7-cxv4-gfx2 Astro: Remote code execution through AVIF image optimization | Critical | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-376h-93r7-7g6f Astro: Authorization bypass from missing path-segment boundary check when stripping the configured base | Medium | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-8mv7-9c27-98vc Astro: composable `astro/hono` pipeline bypasses `security.checkOrigin` when `middleware()` is absent or misordered | Medium | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-f48w-9m4c-m7f5 Astro: XSS via unescaped spread attribute names in renderHTMLElement (incomplete fix for CVE-2026-54298) | Medium | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-4g3v-8h47-v7g6 Astro: Reflected XSS via unescaped View Transition animation properties | Medium | Also affects astro |
| GHSA-vj59-8hwv-xxmv Astro: Authorization Bypass via Decode Iteration Limit and Rewrite Path Canonicalization Mismatch | High | Also affects astro |
Credits: jlgore
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