undici vulnerable to CRLF Injection via blob-like body 'type' property
Published 3 Aug 2026 · Updated 10 Sept 2026
Affected packages
- Affected
- <6.28.0
- Fixed in
- 6.28.0
npm install undici@6.28.0- Affected
- >=7.0.0 <7.29.0
- Fixed in
- 7.29.0
npm install undici@7.29.0- Affected
- >=8.0.0 <8.9.0
- Fixed in
- 8.9.0
npm install undici@8.9.0Details
Impact
When an application passes a duck-typed blob-like body to undici's HTTP/1.1 dispatcher (via request(), stream(), pipeline(), or dispatch()) with a .type derived from untrusted input, an attacker can inject CRLF sequences (\r\n) to append arbitrary HTTP headers and potentially smuggle a second request past the upstream.
The vulnerable branch in lib/dispatcher/client-h1.js pushes body.type directly into the outgoing headers with no validation, while every other header path in undici goes through isValidHeaderValue():
} else if (util.isBlobLike(body) && request.contentType == null && body.type) {
headers.push('content-type', body.type) // bypasses isValidHeaderValue()
}The bug requires a hand-rolled duck-typed blob object or a Blob subclass with a controlled .type. Native Blob is safe because its constructor strips CRLF from .type. fetch() is unaffected because it validates via the Headers class. Ecosystem consumers that build duck-typed blob shapes from user input include form-data-encoder, formdata-polyfill, and formdata-node.
Same defect class as CVE-2022-35948 (explicit content-type sink, fixed in undici 5.8.2) and CVE-2026-1527 (upgrade option sink, fixed in 6.24.0 / 7.24.0), both closed by adding isValidHeaderValue() on their respective sinks. This branch was missed.
Patches
Patched in undici v6.28.0, v7.29.0, and v8.9.0. Users should upgrade to one of these versions or later.
Workarounds
- Set an explicit, validated
content-typeheader on the request options (skips the vulnerable branch). - Use a native
Blob(orfetch-blob) instead of a hand-rolled duck-typed object. - Reject control characters in the MIME type before assigning it to
.type. - Use
fetch()instead of the non-fetchAPIs.
Is GHSA-m8rv-5g2x-5cg5 in any of your client repos?
Checking one package by hand is fine. Checking it across forty client projects is not. NPMscan reads the lockfiles in every GitHub repo you pick, finds each project with an affected undici, and gives you the command that fixes it.
References
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/security/advisories/GHSA-m8rv-5g2x-5cg5
- Advisorynvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-15157
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/commit/33928bc24f742ea8422ed90d17f2e0cc83e4d09d
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/commit/740a0b7c173cb4a83a5b693e96e8f3a116cfc400
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/commit/7d3cf924c262c486bc77f951348f4e5c847b7b42
- Linkcna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html
- Packagegithub.com/nodejs/undici
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/releases/tag/v6.28.0
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/releases/tag/v7.29.0
- Linkgithub.com/nodejs/undici/releases/tag/v8.9.0
Advisory data from OSV.dev (opens OSV.dev in a new tab), refreshed daily.