CVE-2026-42034
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Summary
For stream request bodies, maxBodyLength is bypassed when maxRedirects is set to 0 (native http/https transport path). Oversized streamed uploads are sent fully even when the caller sets strict body limits.
Details
Relevant flow in lib/adapters/http.js:
- 556-564: maxBodyLength check applies only to buffered/non-stream data.
- 681-682: maxRedirects === 0 selects native http/https transport.
- 694-699: options.maxBodyLength is set, but native transport does not enforce it.
- 925-945: stream is piped directly to socket (data.pipe(req)) with no Axios byte counting.
This creates a path-specific bypass for streamed uploads.
PoC
Environment:
- Axios main at commit f7a4ee2
- Node v24.2.0
Steps:
- Start an HTTP server that counts uploaded bytes and returns {received}.
- Send a 2 MiB Readable stream with:
- adapter: 'http'
- maxBodyLength: 1024
- maxRedirects: 0
Observed:
- Request succeeds; server reports received: 2097152.
Control checks:
- Same stream with default/nonzero redirects: rejected with ERR_FR_MAX_BODY_LENGTH_EXCEEDED.
- Buffered body with maxRedirects: 0: rejected with ERR_BAD_REQUEST.
Impact
Type: DoS / uncontrolled upstream upload / resource exhaustion. Impacted: Node.js services using streamed request bodies with maxBodyLength expecting hard enforcement, especially when following Axios guidance to use maxRedirects: 0 for streams.
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
GitHub
3.9
CVSS SCORE
5.3medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| axios | npm | - | - | >=1.0.0,<1.15.1 | 1.15.1 |
| axios | npm | - | - | <=0.31.0 | 0.31.1 |
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).
Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.
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.
Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
NIST
3.9
CVSS SCORE
5.3mediumDebian
-
Ubuntu
-
CVSS SCORE
N/AmediumChainguard
CGA-64f5-qwc8-86w6
-
minimos
MINI-2229-pjx5-5fcf
-
minimos
MINI-22rj-r42g-9p7r
-
minimos
MINI-694w-jr27-6g9w
-
minimos
MINI-fj29-3v46-2h62
-
minimos
MINI-ghm7-cwg5-6mx6
-
minimos
MINI-w68v-w3f8-6w3r
-
minimos
MINI-x3vv-37gg-cxhx
-