chore(deps): update dependency dompurify@<3.3.2 to v3.4.12 [security]#2573
Open
renovate[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
chore(deps): update dependency dompurify@<3.3.2 to v3.4.12 [security]#2573renovate[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
renovate[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
renovate
Bot
force-pushed
the
renovate/npm-dompurify-3.3.2-vulnerability
branch
from
April 21, 2026 18:58
2c276ce to
d64b565
Compare
renovate
Bot
force-pushed
the
renovate/npm-dompurify-3.3.2-vulnerability
branch
from
April 21, 2026 18:59
d64b565 to
2c276ce
Compare
renovate
Bot
force-pushed
the
renovate/npm-dompurify-3.3.2-vulnerability
branch
from
July 19, 2026 04:19
2c276ce to
ce245f6
Compare
renovate
Bot
force-pushed
the
renovate/npm-dompurify-3.3.2-vulnerability
branch
from
July 22, 2026 00:12
ce245f6 to
b4b671c
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR contains the following updates:
3.3.2→3.4.12DOMPurify's ADD_TAGS function form bypasses FORBID_TAGS due to short-circuit evaluation
CVE-2026-65903 / GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp
More information
Details
Summary
In
src/purify.ts:1117-1123,ADD_TAGSas a function (viaEXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck) bypassesFORBID_TAGSdue to short-circuit evaluation.The condition:
When
tagCheck(tagName)returnstrue, the entire condition isfalseand the element is kept —FORBID_TAGS[tagName]is never evaluated.Inconsistency
This contradicts the attribute-side pattern at line 1214 where
FORBID_ATTRexplicitly wins first:For tags, FORBID should also take precedence over ADD.
Impact
Applications using both
ADD_TAGSas a function andFORBID_TAGSsimultaneously get unexpected behavior — forbidden tags are allowed through. Config-dependent but a genuine logic inconsistency.Suggested Fix
Check
FORBID_TAGSbeforetagCheck:Affected Version
v3.3.3 (commit 883ac15)
Severity
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify has a SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES bypass in RETURN_DOM mode
CVE-2026-41239 / GHSA-crv5-9vww-q3g8
More information
Details
Summary
mainat883ac15, introduced in v1.0.10 (7fc196db)SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATESstrips{{...}}expressions from untrusted HTML. This works in string mode but not withRETURN_DOMorRETURN_DOM_FRAGMENT, allowing XSS via template-evaluating frameworks like Vue 2.Technical Details
DOMPurify strips template expressions in two passes:
purify.ts:1179-1191):purify.ts:1679-1683). This is the safety net that catches expressions that only form after the DOM settles.The
RETURN_DOMpath returns before pass #2 ever runs (purify.ts:1637-1661):The payload
{<foo></foo>{constructor.constructor('alert(1)')()}<foo></foo>}exploits this:TEXT("{")→<foo>→TEXT("{payload}")→<foo>→TEXT("}")— no single node contains{{, so pass #1 misses it<foo>is not allowed, so DOMPurify removes it but keeps surrounding text.outerHTMLreads them as{{payload}}, which Vue 2 compiles and executesReproduce
Open the following html in any browser and
alert(1)pops up.Impact
Any application that sanitizes attacker-controlled HTML with
SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES: trueandRETURN_DOM: true(orRETURN_DOM_FRAGMENT: true), then mounts the result into a template-evaluating framework, is vulnerable to XSS.Recommendations
Fix
normalize()merges the split text nodes, then the same regex from the string path catches the expression. Placed before the fragment logic, this fixes bothRETURN_DOMandRETURN_DOM_FRAGMENT.if (RETURN_DOM) { + if (SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES) { + body.normalize(); + let html = body.innerHTML; + arrayForEach([MUSTACHE_EXPR, ERB_EXPR, TMPLIT_EXPR], (expr: RegExp) => { + html = stringReplace(html, expr, ' '); + }); + body.innerHTML = html; + } + if (RETURN_DOM_FRAGMENT) { returnNode = createDocumentFragment.call(body.ownerDocument);Severity
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify: FORBID_TAGS bypassed by function-based ADD_TAGS predicate (asymmetry with FORBID_ATTR fix)
CVE-2026-41240 / GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m
More information
Details
There is an inconsistency between FORBID_TAGS and FORBID_ATTR handling when function-based ADD_TAGS is used.
Commit c361baa added an early exit for FORBID_ATTR at line 1214:
The same fix was not applied to FORBID_TAGS. At line 1118-1123, when EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck returns true, the short-circuit evaluation skips the FORBID_TAGS check entirely:
This allows forbidden elements to survive sanitization with their attributes intact.
PoC (tested against current HEAD in Node.js + jsdom):
Confirmed affected: iframe, object, embed, form. The src/action/data attributes survive because attribute sanitization runs separately and allows these URLs.
Compare with FORBID_ATTR which correctly wins:
Suggested fix: add FORBID_TAGS early exit before the tagCheck evaluation, mirroring line 1214:
This requires function-based ADD_TAGS in the config, which is uncommon. But the asymmetry with the FORBID_ATTR fix is clear, and the impact includes iframe and form injection with external URLs.
Reporter: Koda Reef
Severity
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify: Prototype Pollution to XSS Bypass via CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING Fallback
CVE-2026-41238 / GHSA-v9jr-rg53-9pgp
More information
Details
Summary
DOMPurify versions 3.0.1 through 3.3.3 (latest) are vulnerable to a prototype pollution-based XSS bypass. When an application uses
DOMPurify.sanitize()with the default configuration (noCUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLINGoption), a prior prototype pollution gadget can inject permissivetagNameCheckandattributeNameCheckregex values intoObject.prototype, causing DOMPurify to allow arbitrary custom elements with arbitrary attributes — including event handlers — through sanitization.Affected Versions
Object.create(null)for initialization, no|| {}reassignment)|| {}reassignment was introduced in the 3.0.0→3.0.1 refactorRoot Cause
In
purify.jsat line 590, during config parsing:When no
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLINGis specified in the config (the default usage pattern),cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLINGisundefined, and the fallback{}is used. This plain object inherits fromObject.prototype.Lines 591-598 then check
cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING(the original config property) — which isundefined— so the conditional blocks that would settagNameCheckandattributeNameCheckfrom the config are never entered.As a result,
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagNameCheckandCUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING.attributeNameCheckresolve via the prototype chain. If an attacker has pollutedObject.prototype.tagNameCheckandObject.prototype.attributeNameCheckwith permissive values (e.g.,/.*/), these polluted values flow into DOMPurify's custom element validation at lines 973-977 and attribute validation, causing all custom elements and all attributes to be allowed.Impact
DOMPurify.sanitize(userInput)call is affected.Proof of Concept
Tested configurations that are vulnerable:
DOMPurify.sanitize(input)DOMPurify.sanitize(input, {})DOMPurify.sanitize(input, { CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING: null })DOMPurify.sanitize(input, { CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING: {} })Suggested Fix
Change line 590 from:
To:
The
create(null)function (already used elsewhere in DOMPurify, e.g., inclone()) creates an object with no prototype, preventing prototype chain inheritance.Alternative application-level mitigation:
Applications can protect themselves by always providing an explicit
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLINGin their config:Timeline
Credit
https://github.com/trace37labs
Severity
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify: Cross-realm IN_PLACE sanitization leaves executable markup intact via realm-bound
instanceofchecksCVE-2026-49458 / GHSA-hpcv-96wg-7vj8
More information
Details
Cross-realm IN_PLACE sanitization leaves executable markup intact via realm-bound
instanceofchecksCWE: CWE-79 (XSS — Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation) via CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure — realm-bound
instanceofchecks fail-open on foreign-realm DOM nodes) and CWE-501 (Trust Boundary Violation — foreign-realm nodes accepted for sanitization but later checks are bound to the parent realm)Summary
DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true })accepts a DOM node from any same-origin realm (e.g. a node owned by an application-created iframe document), but several follow-on security checks compare the node against constructors from the parent realm. Because constructors are per-realm,instanceof HTMLFormElement,instanceof NamedNodeMap,instanceof DocumentFragment, andinstanceof Elementall returnfalsefor nodes belonging to the iframe's realm. The library therefore proceeds as if the foreign-realm form is not clobberable, the foreign-realm<template>'s.contentis not a document fragment, and the foreign-realm attached shadow root is not a document fragment — silently skipping the clobber/template-content/shadow-DOM sanitization branches that those checks gate. Attacker-controlled markup survives in form attributes, template content, and attached shadow roots, and executes when the application later inserts or activates the sanitized node.Affected
mainat89da34e03ec17868e561f87f3747a9371b61a9e7<iframe srcdoc>) and then callsDOMPurify.sanitize(foreignNode, { IN_PLACE: true })against a sanitizer instance bound to a different realmNot affected:
DOMPurify.sanitize(dirtyString)— the library calls its own parser inside_initDocument, the resulting nodes belong to the sanitizer's own realm, and theinstanceofchecks resolve as expectedVulnerability details
The unifying defect is that
_isClobbered,_sanitizeShadowDOM's template-content recursion, and_sanitizeAttachedShadowRootsall use realm-boundinstanceofchecks against the parent-realm constructors. Each branch fails-open for foreign-realm objects.[A] —
_isClobberedgates onelement instanceof HTMLFormElementsrc/purify.ts:1120-1140:A foreign-realm
<form>is an instance of the foreign realm'sHTMLFormElement, not the parent realm's. The leadinginstanceofshort-circuits tofalse, so_isClobberedreturnsfalseregardless of the named-property clobbering present on the form. The follow-on_sanitizeAttributesthen iteratescurrentNode.attributes— which itself can be a clobbered value (a foreign-realm<input>whosename="attributes"shadows the form's realNamedNodeMap). The attribute walk traverses the wrong collection and never reaches the actualonmouseover/onclick/action=javascript:attributes on the form root.[B] —
_sanitizeShadowDOMgates template recursion oncontent instanceof DocumentFragmentsrc/purify.ts:1660-1662:The same check exists in the main iterator at
:1861-1862:For a
<template>element constructed in a foreign realm,template.contentis aDocumentFragmentfrom that realm — not from the parent realm. Both checks miss it, and the template's contents (which carry attacker-controlled<img src=x onerror=...>etc.) are never walked. The sanitized output appears clean from the outside, but the moment a consumer doesnode.cloneNode(true)/importNode(template.content, true)/ inserts it into the live DOM, the embedded handler fires.[C] —
_sanitizeAttachedShadowRootsgates recursion onsr instanceof DocumentFragmentsrc/purify.ts:1702-1712:For a host element constructed in a foreign realm with
host.attachShadow({mode:'open'}),host.shadowRootis a foreign-realmShadowRoot(which extends the foreign realm'sDocumentFragment). Theinstanceof DocumentFragmentagainst the parent realm fails. The whole shadow subtree is skipped. When the host is later attached to the live document, the shadow DOM activates with attacker-controlled content.The mismatch
DOMPurify accepts foreign-realm nodes for sanitization (the entry-point's
_isNode(dirty)at:1750is realm-agnostic — it checks shape, not constructor identity), so callers reasonably expect that the library's downstream defenses are equally realm-agnostic. They are not.[A]/[B]/[C]each fail-open for foreign-realm objects. A correct guard at each of those sites would use a realm-independent shape check (e.g.,nodeType === 11forDocumentFragment, tag-name comparison forHTMLFormElementrecognition).Proof of concept
Each PoC creates the attacker payload in a same-origin iframe, then calls the parent-realm
DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true })and verifies that handler execution succeeds on subsequent activation.PoC 1 — cross-realm form clobbering survives
Observed (Chromium 148, DOMPurify 3.4.5, HEAD
89da34e):{ "sanitizeError": null, "before": { "formIsMainRealmHTMLFormElement": false, "formIsForeignRealmHTMLFormElement": true, "formAttributesType": "[object HTMLInputElement]", "formAttributesEqualsInput": true }, "after": { "html": "<div id=\"dirty\"><form onmouseover=\"window.parent.__dompurify_xss=(window.parent.__dompurify_xss||0)+1\"><input></form></div>", "formOnmouseover": "window.parent.__dompurify_xss=(window.parent.__dompurify_xss||0)+1", "xssExecuted": 1 } }PoC 2 — cross-realm
<template>content is never walkedObserved:
{ "before": { "templateIsMainRealmHTMLTemplateElement": false, "contentIsMainRealmDocumentFragment": false, "contentIsForeignRealmDocumentFragment": true }, "after": { "templateInnerHTMLAfter": "<img src=\"x\" onerror=\"window.parent.__dompurify_template_xss=(window.parent.__dompurify_template_xss||0)+1\">", "xssExecuted": 1 } }PoC 3 — cross-realm attached shadow root is never walked
Observed:
{ "before": { "hostIsMainRealmElement": false, "shadowRootIsMainRealmDocumentFragment": false, "shadowRootIsForeignRealmDocumentFragment": true }, "after": { "shadowRootInnerHTMLAfter": "<img src=\"x\" onerror=\"window.parent.__dompurify_shadow_xss=(window.parent.__dompurify_shadow_xss||0)+1\"><b>safe text</b>", "xssExecuted": 1 } }All three PoCs run cleanly against
dist/purify.jsbuilt from currentmainHEAD89da34e.Impact
Direct
Any application that parses, isolates, or constructs untrusted DOM inside a same-origin iframe (a common technique for
<base href>isolation,document.writesandboxing, layout pre-measurement, declarative-shadow-root attachment, etc.) and then hands the resulting node to a parent-realm DOMPurify instance withIN_PLACE: trueis vulnerable. The library returns a node whose top-level shape looks sanitized, but executable attacker markup remains in:onmouseover,onfocus,onclick,action="javascript:...",formaction=,target=,id=(DOM-clobbering target), and the full attribute-allowlist set, because_sanitizeAttributeswalks a clobbered.attributesinstead of the realNamedNodeMap.<template>content —<img onerror>,<svg><script>,<iframe srcdoc>, etc., because the inert template tree is never recursed into.XSS triggers when the consuming code:
importNode/cloneNode(true)/node.appendChild(template.content)into the live DOM.<img onerror>fires synchronously during the insertion microtask).Indirect / second-order
<template>parsing for performance reasons. If they pipe attacker-influenced content through such a template and then run DOMPurify on the parent-realm host, the template body is sanitization-skipped.<base>/ form submission, then sanitize via the main page's DOMPurify.The known prior IN_PLACE-cross-window fix (which closed an earlier cross-window primitive) does not cover the realm-bound
instanceofchecks at[A],[B],[C]; currentmainHEAD is still affected.Root cause
Per-realm constructors.
instanceof Xchecks the prototype chain against the parent realm'sX.prototype. Foreign-realm objects have a differentX.prototypeand so fail every such check. The sanitizer accepts foreign-realm DOM nodes forIN_PLACEsanitization (the entry-point only checks node shape), but several internal security decisions are still bound to the parent realm. This produces an inconsistency: "we accept your node, but we silently behave as if it is not a form, not a template, not a shadow root."Other realm-bound
instanceofsites in the same file that should likely be audited as part of the same fix sweep:Suggested fix
Use realm-independent shape checks consistently for any decision made on a node accepted from
IN_PLACE:HTMLFormElementdetection — compare via the realm-independentgetNodeNamecached prototype getter introduced for the recent shadow-root traversal hardening:DocumentFragmentdetection —nodeType === NODE_TYPE.documentFragment(i.e.,11), notinstanceof DocumentFragment. The check is already realm-independent becauseNode.nodeTypeis a numeric constant. Same change for the<template>-content and attached-shadow-root recursion sites.NamedNodeMapdetection — readelement.attributesvia the cachedElement.prototype.attributesgetter (introducegetAttributes = lookupGetter(ElementPrototype, 'attributes')) and verifynodeType === 11-style shape (length is a number, indexed[i]returns objects with.name/.valuestrings). Do not rely oninstanceof NamedNodeMap.Elementdetection at:1296— replacecurrentNode instanceof Elementwith a shape check (getNodeType(currentNode) === NODE_TYPE.element).The invariant the fix should encode: once
IN_PLACEaccepts a foreign-realm node for sanitization, every downstream security decision on that node must be foreign-realm-safe. The cached prototype getters introduced for the shadow-root hardening already point at the right pattern; the fix is to extend that pattern to every realm-bound check in the sanitization path.Severity
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify: IN_PLACE mode preserves attributes of a clobbered root element, allowing XSS via attacker-controlled root DOM
CVE-2026-49459 / GHSA-r47g-fvhr-h676
More information
Details
IN_PLACE mode preserves attributes of a clobbered root element, allowing XSS via attacker-controlled root DOM
CWE: CWE-79 (XSS — Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation) via CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure — silent no-op when
_forceRemoveis called on a parent-less node)Summary
When
DOMPurify.sanitize(root, { IN_PLACE: true })is called androotis a<form>whose own attributes carry an event handler (onmouseover,onfocus,onclick, etc.), a single descendant element with aname=attribute matching any of the property names_isClobberedchecks (nodeName,setAttribute,namespaceURI,insertBefore,hasChildNodes,childNodes) is sufficient to bypass attribute sanitization on the root._forceRemovesilently no-ops because the root has no parent; the iterator drives on to_sanitizeAttributes, which early-returns on clobbered nodes — and the event handler attribute is never inspected. The sanitized return is the same root, with the handler live.This affects current
mainat89da34e(the just-landed DOM-clobbering hardening fix at89da34eaddressed_sanitizeAttachedShadowRootswalk traversal, not the main_sanitizeElements/_sanitizeAttributespipeline against the iterator-root node).Affected
mainat89da34e03ec17868e561f87f3747a9371b61a9e7DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true })wherenodeis built from untrusted HTML (e.g., parsed viacreateElement('template').innerHTML = dirtythentemplate.content.firstElementChildhanded in)Not affected:
DOMPurify.sanitize(dirtyString)— the library builds the DOM itself inside_initDocument, the root is the cleanly-created document body, and clobber-named children of the body cannot shadowbodynamed properties (HTMLBodyElement does not carry[LegacyOverrideBuiltIns])Vulnerability details
Code paths
[A] —
_forceRemoveatsrc/purify.ts:930-939:When the iterator-root has no parent (the standard IN_PLACE case where the caller hands in a detached node),
getParentNode(node)returnsnull,null.removeChild(node)throws, the catch falls toremove(node)— which per WebIDL isElement.prototype.remove.call(node), and per spec does nothing if the node has no parent. Nothing about_forceRemove's contract acknowledges this — the function appears to its callers as "the node is gone now," but the node is still in place.[B] —
_sanitizeAttributesatsrc/purify.ts:1490-1492:The skip at
[B]is deliberate — the intent is to avoid touching nodes the library has already decided to discard. The invariant the comment implies is "if_isClobbered, then_sanitizeElementsalready removed this node, so we will never reach_sanitizeAttributeson it." That invariant holds for every non-root node (their_forceRemovesucceeds in detaching them), but fails for the iterator root in IN_PLACE mode.The mismatch is between [A] and [B]: [A] assumes "removal" means the node will not be observed again, and [B] assumes any clobbered node it sees has already been removed. Neither holds for the iterator root. A correct guard would either make
_forceRemovefail loudly on parent-less nodes (so the caller can bail out of IN_PLACE entirely) or have_sanitizeAttributesstrip attributes from clobbered roots before returning.Iterator call site
src/purify.ts:1850-1864ignores the boolean return value of_sanitizeElements:If the return value were checked and
_sanitizeAttributesskipped when the node was "killed," the bug would not exist as a discrete issue — but currently_sanitizeAttributesis the only line of defense for a node that_sanitizeElementscould not actually detach.Why the clobber works
In Chromium/WebKit/Firefox,
HTMLFormElementcarries the WebIDL[LegacyOverrideBuiltIns]extended attribute on its named-property getter. A descendant element withname="X"(orid="X", for radio-button-like names) shadows the matching property on the form, including properties inherited fromElement,Node, andEventTargetprototypes. This is the same primitive the just-landed89da34efix addresses for shadow-root traversal, but_isClobbered's typeof checks (and the bypass-by-detection-failure path here) are independent of that fix.Verified clobber targets (each name= value independently triggers
_isClobbered):name=value_isClobberedchecksnodeNametypeof element.nodeName !== 'string'<INPUT>)setAttributetypeof element.setAttribute !== 'function'<embed>/<applet>/<iframe>ARE callable; see "Note on callable elements" belownamespaceURItypeof element.namespaceURI !== 'string'insertBeforetypeof element.insertBefore !== 'function'hasChildNodestypeof element.hasChildNodes !== 'function'childNodes!(element.childNodes && typeof element.childNodes.length === 'number')<INPUT>has no.lengthattributes!(element.attributes instanceof NamedNodeMap)<INPUT>is not a NamedNodeMap)textContenttypeof element.textContent !== 'string'removeChildtypeof element.removeChild !== 'function'removeAttributetypeof element.removeAttribute !== 'function'Any single one of the ten property names in
_isClobbered's checklist is sufficient as the bypass trigger.Proof of concept
(1) Minimal — runnable in a single browser context
(2) End-to-end — Playwright against
mainHEADObserved (Chromium 148.0.7778.96, DOMPurify 3.4.5, HEAD
89da34e):(3) Variant matrix — six distinct clobber-target properties
Every property name in
_isClobbered's typeof checklist works as the bypass trigger:This makes the fix less of a one-line patch — every property
_isClobberedchecks for the typeof-spoofing pattern needs to be considered.Impact
Direct
Two distinct impact paths from the same root-attribute-survival primitive:
(a) XSS via event-handler attribute on the surviving root. Any consumer that uses
DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true })wherenodeoriginated from untrusted HTML and is re-inserted into the live document is vulnerable to XSS. The typical pattern is:If
untrustedHtmlis<form onmouseover=…><input name=nodeName>…</form>, the resulting node has theonmouseoverattribute intact when re-inserted into the live document.(b) Every attribute-level defense is bypassed on the surviving root, not just event handlers. The
_sanitizeAttributesearly-return at:1490skips the entire attribute walk for clobbered nodes, so the root preserves attributes that the attribute walk would otherwise sanitize. Verified additional attributes that survive:action="javascript:..."andformaction="javascript:..."— URI validation at:1413never runs. A user click on a submit button inside the sanitized form navigates to thejavascript:URL, executing the handler. Adds a click-triggered XSS path on top of the mouseover/focus event-handler attributes already documented.id="<colliding-name>"— the DOM-clobbering guard at:1352-1359(SANITIZE_DOM && (lcName === 'id' || lcName === 'name') && (value in document || value in formElement)) lives inside_sanitizeAttributesand is skipped. An attacker can therefore landid="cookie",id="body",id="head",id="firstChild", etc. on the surviving form root and use it as a DOM-clobbering primitive against any consumer code that doesdocument.cookie,document.body, etc.target="_top",autofocus,formenctype,formmethod— all survive untouched.oncontentvisibilityautostatechange) survive on the clobbered root via the same skip; the per-name allow-list at:1361-1364never runs.Verified — full attribute set survives on a single payload (PoC):
(c) Defense-in-depth re-sanitization on the same node is INEFFECTIVE — the clobber is sticky. Chromium's
HTMLFormElementnamed-property cache appears to retain the named child reference even after the child'snameattribute is removed during the sanitization pass. Empirically verified — after the first sanitize pass, the input'sname="nodeName"attribute is correctly stripped (the output shows<input>with no attributes), yettypeof form.nodeName === 'object'is still true and the input element is still returned. CallingDOMPurify.sanitize(sameNode, { IN_PLACE: true })a second time hits the same_isClobbered→_forceRemove→_sanitizeAttributesearly-return path. The only effective recovery is serialize-then-reparse:A "belt-and-suspenders" caller that re-runs DOMPurify on its own output is therefore not protected against this primitive on Chromium; the obvious mitigation pattern fails silently. Any user-side workaround needs to route through a string round-trip.
(d) SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES bypass for the root's attributes. When the caller sets
SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES: trueto defend a downstream template engine (Vue, Angular, Liquid, Handlebars, …) from receiving `` /<%…%>/ `${…}` syntax through DOMPurify's output, attribute-level template-syntax stripping runs in the same `_sanitizeAttributes` pass that early-returns on clobbered roots (`:1572-1576`). The root's attributes therefore retain raw template syntax that the downstream engine then evaluates.Verified — same PoC structure, with
SAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES: true:This compounds with (a): a single payload exfiltrates via XSS (immediate) and via SSTI to downstream renderers (delayed).
(Text-node content inside the form is still scrubbed correctly —
_scrubTemplateExpressionsat:1868-1870walks text/comment/CDATA/PI nodes independently and reaches them via the iterator. Only attribute values on the clobbered root escape.)Indirect / second-order
el.innerHTML = …; DOMPurify.sanitize(el, { IN_PLACE: true }). The outerelis fine (it's not the form), but if the first child ofelis taken as the sanitization root in a different code path, the bypass triggers.Why current
mainis also vulnerableCommit
89da34e("fix: fixed a possible DOM clobbering with IN_PLACE and shadow DOM") hardens_sanitizeAttachedShadowRootsvia three new cached prototype getters (getShadowRoot,getNodeName,getNodeType) and an_isClobberedextension that checkselement.childNodes.length. The fix is correct for its scope — shadow-root traversal — but does not change_forceRemove's parent-less-node behavior or_sanitizeAttributes's clobber-skip early-return. The bypass demonstrated here is in the IN_PLACE main pipeline, not the shadow-root walk, and the verification PoC above runs against HEAD89da34eand still succeeds.Suggested fix
Two minimal-risk options:
Make
_forceRemovehonest about failure: return whether the node was actually detached, and have the iterator call site honor that.Then at
:1855, if_sanitizeElementsreturns true AND IN_PLACE, force-strip all attributes of the root before returning the dirty tree. (This is what the user expects — sanitization either succeeds or refuses to return a "sanitized" handle to an unsanitized tree.)Strip attributes inside
_sanitizeAttributesfor clobbered roots: when_isClobbered(currentNode)is true at:1490, instead of early-returning, iteratecurrentNode.attributes(using the cachedgetAttributesif you add one) and remove each viaremoveAttribute. This preserves the existing semantics for non-root clobbered nodes (their attributes-of-a-removed-node will be GC'd anyway) and removes the attack surface for root.Refuse IN_PLACE on parent-less clobbered roots: at the top of the iterator, check that the root either has a parent OR is not
_isClobbered. If both fail, throw. This is the most defensive option but breaks any existing caller that hands in a clobbered detached root expecting "sanitized = empty/safe."Note on callable elements
In Chromium and WebKit,
HTMLEmbedElement,HTMLAppletElement,HTMLIFrameElement, andHTMLScriptElementhavetypeof === 'function'because they expose plugin/iframe[[Call]]traps at the WebIDL level. Aname="setAttribute"child of one of these tags spoofs thesetAttribute typeof === 'function'check — but only matters for the attribute re-set path at:1619, not the bypass demonstrated here (which usesnodeNameand friends). The callable-element vector is worth checking separately as a potentialSAFE_FOR_TEMPLATES-bypass primitive; the present report does not depend on it.Severity
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:NReferences
This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).
DOMPurify:
IN_PLACEmode trusts attacker-controllednodeNameon live non-form nodes, allowing script retention and XSS via attacker-supplied DOM objectsCVE-2026-65901 / GHSA-x4vx-rjvf-j5p4
More information
Details
Summary
When
DOMPurify.sanitize(root, { IN_PLACE: true })is called on an attacker-supplied live DOM node,DOMPurifystill trustscurrentNode.nodeNamefor non-formnodes in the main_sanitizeElementspipeline. A real<script>child node whose observablenodeNameis attacker-controlled can therefore be misclassified as an allowed element and retained. When the sanitized tree is inserted into a live document, the script executes.This affects current
3.4.6. The recentIN_PLACEhardening work covers clobberedformhandling and foreign-realm shadow/template traversal, but does not harden the main per-node element decision for hostile non-formlive nodes.Affected
3.4.6DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true })on attacker-supplied live DOM nodesiframe→ live node passed by referencewindow.open()popup → live node passed by referencedocument.adoptNode(node)and then sanitized in-placeNot affected:
DOMPurify.sanitize(dirtyString)Vulnerability details
Code paths
[A] —
_sanitizeElementsuses the instance-visiblenodeNamefor the allow/forbid decision:For non-
formnodes,_isClobbered(currentNode)returnsfalseearly. The subsequent element decision therefore trustscurrentNode.nodeNamedirectly.[B] —
_isClobberedisform-specific: