GHSA-gf8q-jrpm-jvxq
URL parsing in node-forge could lead to undesired behavior.
Low
npm
- Severity
- Low
- The publisher's own rating, not a CVSS score
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- —
- No score published
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-601 URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
- Fix
1.0.0- Upgrade node-forge to this version or later
Description
Impact
The regex used for the forge.util.parseUrl API would not properly parse certain inputs resulting in a parsed data structure that could lead to undesired behavior.
Patches
forge.util.parseUrl and other very old related URL APIs were removed in 1.0.0 in favor of letting applications use the more modern WHATWG URL Standard API.
Workarounds
Ensure code does not directly or indirectly call forge.util.parseUrl with untrusted input.
References
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:
- Open an issue in forge
- Email us at support@digitalbazaar.com
Affected versions
npm
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| node-forge | < 1.0.0 |
1.0.0 |
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.
node-forge npm → 1.0.0
- npm
npm install node-forge@1.0.0- yarn
yarn add node-forge@1.0.0- pnpm
pnpm add node-forge@1.0.0
Weakness
CWE-601: URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
How to prevent it
- 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. Use a list of approved URLs or domains to be used for redirection.
- Architecture and Design: Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
- 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. For example, ID 1 could map to "/login.asp" and ID 2 could map to "http://www.example.com/". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-45] provide this capability.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that no externally-supplied requests are honored by requiring that all redirect requests include a unique nonce generated by the application [REF-483]. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
- 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. Many open redirect problems occur because the programmer assumed that certain inputs could not be modified, such as cookies and hidden form fields.
- 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].
References
Advisories
Other links
Timeline
- Last updated by the source
- Published
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-4642-5mcj-2rqw Forge: ASN.1 OID first arc truncation in asn1.oidToDer | Low | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-6wvx-3r32-xmcg Forge: Prototype Pollution in forge.http cookie handling via a malicious Set-Cookie | Medium | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-525v-9gp9-w22h Forge: TLS client crash when the server sends no certificate | Medium | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-7wch-p9px-956x Forge: Regular expression denial of service in PEM decoding (pem.decode) | High | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-h6cr-wjv9-3cpp Forge: Denial of Service via infinite loop in BigInteger.modInverse() with negative input (incomplete fix of CVE-2026-33891) | Low | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-4487-j8r4-4g2f Forge: verifyCertificateChain() removes trusted CA certificates with the same subject from the CA store | Low | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-5cwg-6vw7-rj6p Forge: AES-GCM authentication bypass via unvalidated tagLength option | Medium | Also affects node-forge |
| GHSA-jc66-7q78-782g Forge: PKCS#12 MAC forgery and constant-key PBE via zero iteration count | High | Also affects node-forge |
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