GHSA-f98w-7cxr-ff2h CVE-2024-28245

KaTeX's `\includegraphics` does not escape filename

Medium npm

Severity: 6.3 / 10; Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS): 0.41%; Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 34.89% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited: No; Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness: CWE-116 Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output
Fix: 0.16.10; Upgrade katex to this version or later

Description

Impact

KaTeX users who render untrusted mathematical expressions could encounter malicious input using \includegraphics that runs arbitrary JavaScript, or generate invalid HTML.

Patches

Upgrade to KaTeX v0.16.10 to remove this vulnerability.

Workarounds

Avoid use of or turn off the trust option, or set it to forbid \includegraphics commands.
Forbid inputs containing the substring "\\includegraphics".
Sanitize HTML output from KaTeX.

Details

\includegraphics did not properly quote its filename argument, allowing it to generate invalid or malicious HTML that runs scripts.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

Open an issue or security advisory in the KaTeX repository
Email us at katex-security@mit.edu

Affected versions

npm

Package	Vulnerable	Fixed in
katex	`>= 0.11.0, < 0.16.10`	`0.16.10`

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.

katex npm → `0.16.10`

npm

npm install katex@0.16.10

yarn

yarn add katex@0.16.10

pnpm

pnpm add katex@0.16.10

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 6.3

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

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

Weakness

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

nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-28245

Packages

github.com/KaTeX/KaTeX

Timeline

Mar 25, 2024 Published
Sep 10, 2026 Last updated by the source
Oct 31, 2026 Latest EPSS score

Advisory	Severity	Why it's related
GHSA-238p-pmpm-9mq7 KaTeX: Existing prototype pollution can bypass trust restrictions	Low	Also affects katex
GHSA-cg87-wmx4-v546 KaTeX \htmlData does not validate attribute names	High	Also affects katex
GHSA-3wc5-fcw2-2329 KaTeX missing normalization of the protocol in URLs allows bypassing forbidden protocols	Medium	Also affects katex
GHSA-cvr6-37gx-v8wc KaTeX's maxExpand bypassed by Unicode sub/superscripts	Medium	Also affects katex
GHSA-64fm-8hw2-v72w KaTeX's maxExpand bypassed by `\edef`	Medium	Also affects katex
GHSA-qxg6-89mg-rqv8 Vitest: Code injection via unauthenticated manual mock registration	Medium	Same weakness, CWE-116
GHSA-333x-w4r6-6crp fast-uri vulnerable to scheme injection via an unescaped first-segment colon in suffix references	Low	Same weakness, CWE-116
GHSA-xw65-4hp5-5hc7 Handlebars: JavaScript Injection via Unsafe Inline Embedding of Precompiled Templates	Medium	Same weakness, CWE-116

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