GHSA-p9ff-h696-f583
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Summary
server.fs check was not enforced to the fetchModule method that is exposed in Vite dev server's WebSocket.
Impact
Only apps that match the following conditions are affected:
- explicitly exposes the Vite dev server to the network (using
--hostorserver.hostconfig option) - WebSocket is not disabled by
server.ws: false
Arbitrary files on the server (development machine, CI environment, container, etc.) can be exposed.
Details
If it is possible to connect to the Vite dev server’s WebSocket without an Origin header, an attacker can invoke fetchModule via the custom WebSocket event vite:invoke and combine file://... with ?raw (or ?inline) to retrieve the contents of arbitrary files on the server as a JavaScript string (e.g., export default "...").
The access control enforced in the HTTP request path (such as server.fs.allow) is not applied to this WebSocket-based execution path.
PoC
Start the dev server on the target Example (used during validation with this repository):
pnpm -C playground/alias exec vite --host 0.0.0.0 --port 5173Confirm that access is blocked via the HTTP path (example: arbitrary file)
curl -i 'http://localhost:5173/@fs/etc/passwd?raw'Result:
403 Restricted(outside the allow list)Confirm that the same file can be retrieved via the WebSocket path By connecting to the HMR WebSocket without an
Originheader and sending avite:invokerequest that callsfetchModulewith afile://...URL and?raw, the file contents are returned as a JavaScript module.
GitHub
CVSS SCORE
8.2high| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| vite | npm | - | - | >=6.0.0,<=6.4.1 | 6.4.2 |
| vite | npm | - | - | >=7.0.0,<=7.3.1 | 7.3.2 |
| vite | npm | - | - | >=8.0.0,<=8.0.4 | 8.0.5 |
CVSS:4 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 successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: A race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability. The successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker. The attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful. Network injection. The attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
The attacker is unauthenticated 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 human user, other than the attacker. Examples include: a remote attacker is able to send packets to a target system a locally authenticated attacker executes code to elevate privileges.
There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System 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.
There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.