#nodejs

All versions of package opcua; all versions of package asyncua are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) due to a missing limitation on the number of received chunks - per single session or in total for all concurrent sessions. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending an unlimited number of huge chunks (e.g. 2GB each) without sending the Final closing chunk.

The package node-opcua before 2.74.0 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) by sending a specifically crafted OPC UA message with a special OPC UA NodeID, when the requested memory allocation exceeds the v8’s memory limit.

The package opcua from 0.0.0 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) due to a missing limitation on the number of received chunks - per single session or in total for all concurrent sessions. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending an unlimited number of huge chunks (e.g. 2GB each) without sending the Final closing chunk.

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform release 4.7.56 is now available with updates to packages and images that fix several bugs and add enhancements. Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Moderate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVE link(s) in the References section.This content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). If you distribute this content, or a modified version of it, you must provide attribution to Red Hat Inc. and provide a link to the original. Related CVEs: * CVE-2022-30631: golang: compress/gzip: stack exhaustion in Reader.Read

Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Reflected in GitHub repository bustle/mobiledoc-kit prior to 0.14.2.

Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Stored in GitHub repository yetiforcecompany/yetiforcecrm prior to 6.4.0.

An update for podman is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Extras. Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Moderate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVE link(s) in the References section.This content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). If you distribute this content, or a modified version of it, you must provide attribution to Red Hat Inc. and provide a link to the original. Related CVEs: * CVE-2022-2738: podman: Security regression of CVE-2020-8945 due to source code management issue * CVE-2022-2739: podman: Security regression of CVE-2020-14370 due to source code management issue

Vitejs Vite before v2.9.13 was discovered to allow attackers to perform a directory traversal via a crafted URL to the victim's service.

### Impact `=< [email protected]` users are vulnerable to _CRLF Injection_ on headers when using unsanitized input as request headers, more specifically, inside the `content-type` header. Example: ``` import { request } from 'undici' const unsanitizedContentTypeInput = 'application/json\r\n\r\nGET /foo2 HTTP/1.1' await request('http://localhost:3000, { method: 'GET', headers: { 'content-type': unsanitizedContentTypeInput }, }) ``` The above snippet will perform two requests in a single `request` API call: 1) `http://localhost:3000/` 2) `http://localhost:3000/foo2` ### Patches This issue was patched in Undici v5.8.1 ### Workarounds Sanitize input when sending content-type headers using user input. ## For more information If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: - Open an issue in [undici repository](https://github.com/nodejs/undici/issues) - To make a report, follow the [SECURITY](https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/HEAD/SECURITY.md) document...

### Impact `undici` is vulnerable to SSRF (Server-side Request Forgery) when an application takes in **user input** into the `path/pathname` option of `undici.request`. If a user specifies a URL such as `http://127.0.0.1` or `//127.0.0.1` ```js const undici = require("undici") undici.request({origin: "http://example.com", pathname: "//127.0.0.1"}) ``` Instead of processing the request as `http://example.org//127.0.0.1` (or `http://example.org/http://127.0.0.1` when `http://127.0.0.1 is used`), it actually processes the request as `http://127.0.0.1/` and sends it to `http://127.0.0.1`. If a developer passes in user input into `path` parameter of `undici.request`, it can result in an _SSRF_ as they will assume that the hostname cannot change, when in actual fact it can change because the specified path parameter is combined with the base URL. ### Patches This issue was fixed in `[email protected]`. ### Workarounds The best workaround is to validate user input before passing it to the...