Skip to content

ip-address: Address6 builds a parse diagnostic proportional to the input with no length bound, allowing a single long string to stall or crash the process

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Sep 15, 2026 in beaugunderson/ip-address • Updated Sep 29, 2026

Package

npm ip-address (npm)

Affected versions

<= 10.7.0

Patched versions

10.7.1

Description

Summary

new Address6() and Address6.isValid() place no bound on the length of the string they parse. When the string contains a character that cannot appear in an IPv6 address, the parser builds a diagnostic that wraps every such character in a 34-byte <span class="parse-error">, so the work and the memory scale with the input rather than with an address. A 1 MiB string of ! costs about 110 MB and 70 ms of synchronous work, 8 MiB costs about 800 MB and half a second, 16 MiB throws a RangeError in place of the documented AddressError, and 32 MiB aborts the Node process. isValid() builds the diagnostic and discards it, so a caller that only asks whether a string is valid pays the full price.

An application that validates an attacker-supplied string with these methods can be stalled or crashed by a single oversized request. This is a crash on input that should have been rejected cleanly, which SECURITY.md lists as in scope.

Details

parse() in src/ipv6.ts checks for characters outside [0-9a-f:/%] and, on finding any, throws an AddressError whose parseMessage is the whole input with each offending character wrapped:

const badCharacters = address.match(constants6.RE_BAD_CHARACTERS);

if (badCharacters) {
  throw new AddressError(
    `Bad character${badCharacters.length > 1 ? 's' : ''} detected in address: ${badCharacters.join('')}`,
    address.replace(constants6.RE_BAD_CHARACTERS, '<span class="parse-error">$1</span>'),
  );
}

RE_BAD_CHARACTERS is /([^0-9a-f:/%])/gi. For an input made entirely of punctuation the match allocates one string per character, the join copies them all into the message, and the replace produces a string 34 times the input. Nothing before this point looks at the length: the constructor strips a CIDR suffix and a zone identifier and hands the rest to parse(). The RE_BAD_ADDRESS branch below it builds its diagnostic the same way at about a third of the ratio, for input in the hex-and-colon alphabet such as fffff: repeated.

parse() is reached only through the constructor, so every entry point that constructs an Address6 from a string it has not already bounded is affected: new Address6(), isValid(), both arguments of fromAddressAndMask() and fromAddressAndWildcardMask(), fromWildcard(), and the prefix argument of fromAddress4Nat64() and toAddress4Nat64(). fromURL() admits only hex, colons, and dots in a host, so it reaches the RE_BAD_ADDRESS branch and not the other. fromArpa() caps its input at 32 nibbles before constructing anything, and fromBigInt(), fromByteArray(), and fromAddress4() build the string themselves, so those are unaffected.

The replace is where size becomes fatal. V8 caps a string at 2^29 - 24 characters, so past 16 MiB of input the replace throws RangeError: Invalid string length rather than the AddressError callers catch; isValid() swallows it, but a constructor call guarded by instanceof AddressError does not. Past 32 MiB the replacement builder's internal array exceeds its maximum size and V8 aborts the process with Fatal JavaScript invalid size error, which no try/catch intercepts.

Affected versions

<= 10.7.0. The diagnostic has had this shape since the parser was written, so every release is affected.

Impact

Address6.isValid() on N bytes of !, measured on node 24.19.0:

Input Wall time Transient heap Outcome
16 KiB 1 ms 1 MB false
1 MiB 73 ms 112 MB false
8 MiB 464 ms 784 MB false
16 MiB RangeError: Invalid string length from the constructor; isValid() returns false
32 MiB the process aborts

The parse is synchronous, so the event loop is blocked for the whole of the wall time and nothing else on that process is served. The heap is transient and is reclaimed after the call returns, so memory does not accumulate across requests; the abort at 32 MiB is a single request. Address4 has no diagnostic of this shape and parses the same 8 MiB in a few milliseconds.

Reachability

Reaching the sizes above requires that the application hand the parser a string it has not already bounded. A host taken from a URL or an HTTP header is bounded by the server's header limit (Node's default is 16 KB), and at that size the cost is a millisecond. The megabyte sizes need a request body the application accepts at that scale and passes through unchecked. Common body parsers default to between 100 KB and 1 MB, which caps the effect at a stall of under 100 ms per request, and the abort needs 32 MiB in a single field, which no default admits. The severity is scored for the stall, not the abort: an application that accepts 32 MiB bodies into an address parser is the exception, and the reader running one should treat this as a crash.

Proof of concept

npm i ip-address@10.7.0, then:

const { Address6 } = require('ip-address');

for (const mib of [1, 8]) {
  const input = '!'.repeat(mib * 1024 * 1024);
  const before = process.memoryUsage().heapUsed;
  const start = process.hrtime.bigint();

  Address6.isValid(input);

  const ms = Number(process.hrtime.bigint() - start) / 1e6;
  const mb = (process.memoryUsage().heapUsed - before) / 1048576;

  console.log(`${mib} MiB: ${ms.toFixed(0)} ms, ${mb.toFixed(0)} MB`);
}

try {
  new Address6('!'.repeat(16 * 1024 * 1024));
} catch (e) {
  console.log(`16 MiB: ${e.name}: ${e.message}`);
}

new Address6('!'.repeat(32 * 1024 * 1024));

On affected versions (node 24.19.0):

1 MiB: 73 ms, 112 MB
8 MiB: 464 ms, 784 MB
16 MiB: RangeError: Invalid string length


#
# Fatal error in , line 0
# Fatal JavaScript invalid size error 142606336
#

The last line is V8 terminating the process; the script does not reach its end.

Remediation

Upgrade to the patched release. In the fix, the constructor rejects an address longer than the family allows before parse() runs: 45 characters for IPv6 once the CIDR suffix and zone identifier are stripped (six four-digit groups, six colons, and a dotted quad, the same line CPython's ipaddress module draws), and 15 characters for IPv4. The rejection is an AddressError with no parseMessage, so isValid() returns false for the cost of a length comparison and the 32 MiB input above is rejected in the same time as a 46-character one. A zone identifier is not counted, since it never reaches the diagnostic.

This rejects nothing a previous release accepted: every string longer than the limit already failed to parse.

If you cannot upgrade immediately, reject a candidate longer than an address with a zone identifier can be before you parse it:

if (host.length > 64) throw new Error('not an IP address');

References

@beaugunderson beaugunderson published to beaugunderson/ip-address Sep 15, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Sep 28, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 29, 2026
Reviewed Sep 29, 2026
Last updated Sep 29, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability Low
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(32nd percentile)

Weaknesses

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource. Learn more on MITRE.

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-101911

GHSA ID

GHSA-h3mg-xc3c-68pw

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.