Skip to content

xmldom has XML injection through unvalidated DocumentType serialization

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 18, 2026 in xmldom/xmldom • Updated May 8, 2026

Package

npm @xmldom/xmldom (npm)

Affected versions

< 0.8.13
>= 0.9.0, < 0.9.10

Patched versions

0.8.13
0.9.10
npm xmldom (npm)
<= 0.6.0
None

Description

Summary

The package serializes DocumentType node fields (internalSubset, publicId, systemId) verbatim
without any escaping or validation. When these fields are set programmatically to attacker-controlled
strings, XMLSerializer.serializeToString can produce output where the DOCTYPE declaration is
terminated early and arbitrary markup appears outside it.

Details

DOMImplementation.createDocumentType(qualifiedName, publicId, systemId, internalSubset) validates
only qualifiedName against the XML QName production. The remaining three arguments are stored
as-is with no validation.

The XMLSerializer emits DocumentType nodes as:

<!DOCTYPE name[ PUBLIC pubid][ SYSTEM sysid][ [internalSubset]]>

All fields are pushed into the output buffer verbatim — no escaping, no quoting added.

internalSubset injection: The serializer wraps internalSubset with [ and ]. A value
containing ]> closes the internal subset and the DOCTYPE declaration at the injection point.
Any content after ]> in internalSubset appears outside the DOCTYPE in the serialized output as
raw XML markup. Reported by @TharVid (GHSA-f6ww-3ggp-fr8h). Affected: @xmldom/xmldom ≥ 0.9.0
via createDocumentType API; 0.8.x only via direct property write.

publicId injection: The serializer emits publicId verbatim after PUBLIC with no
quoting added. A value containing an injected system identifier (e.g.,
"pubid" SYSTEM "evil") breaks the intended quoting context, injecting a fake SYSTEM entry
into the serialized DOCTYPE declaration. Identified during internal security research. Affected:
both branches, all versions back to 0.1.0.

systemId injection: The serializer emits systemId verbatim. A value containing >
terminates the DOCTYPE declaration early; content after > appears as raw XML markup outside
the DOCTYPE context. Identified during internal security research. Affected: both branches, all
versions back to 0.1.0.

The parse path is safe: the SAX parser enforces the PubidLiteral and SystemLiteral grammar
productions, which exclude the relevant characters, and the internal subset parser only accepts a
subset it can structurally validate. The vulnerability is reachable only through programmatic
createDocumentType calls with attacker-controlled arguments.

Affected code

lib/dom.js — createDocumentType (lines 898–910):

createDocumentType: function (qualifiedName, publicId, systemId, internalSubset) {
    validateQualifiedName(qualifiedName);          // only qualifiedName is validated
    var node = new DocumentType(PDC);
    node.name = qualifiedName;
    node.nodeName = qualifiedName;
    node.publicId = publicId || '';               // stored verbatim
    node.systemId = systemId || '';               // stored verbatim
    node.internalSubset = internalSubset || '';   // stored verbatim
    node.childNodes = new NodeList();
    return node;
},

lib/dom.js — serializer DOCTYPE case (lines 2948–2964):

case DOCUMENT_TYPE_NODE:
    var pubid = node.publicId;
    var sysid = node.systemId;
    buf.push(g.DOCTYPE_DECL_START, ' ', node.name);
    if (pubid) {
        buf.push(' ', g.PUBLIC, ' ', pubid);
        if (sysid && sysid !== '.') {
            buf.push(' ', sysid);
        }
    } else if (sysid && sysid !== '.') {
        buf.push(' ', g.SYSTEM, ' ', sysid);
    }
    if (node.internalSubset) {
        buf.push(' [', node.internalSubset, ']');  // internalSubset emitted verbatim
    }
    buf.push('>');
    return;

PoC

internalSubset injection

const { DOMImplementation, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const impl = new DOMImplementation();
const doctype = impl.createDocumentType(
    'root',
    '',
    '',
    ']><injected/><![CDATA['
);
const doc = impl.createDocument(null, 'root', doctype);
const xml = new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc);
console.log(xml);
// <!DOCTYPE root []><injected/><![CDATA[]><root/>
//                   ^^^^^^^^^^  injected element outside DOCTYPE

publicId quoting context break

const { DOMImplementation, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const impl = new DOMImplementation();
const doctype = impl.createDocumentType(
    'root',
    '"injected PUBLIC_ID" SYSTEM "evil"',
    '',
    ''
);
const doc = impl.createDocument(null, 'root', doctype);
console.log(new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc));
// <!DOCTYPE root PUBLIC "injected PUBLIC_ID" SYSTEM "evil"><root/>
// quoting context broken — SYSTEM entry injected

systemId injection

const { DOMImplementation, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const impl = new DOMImplementation();
const doctype = impl.createDocumentType(
    'root',
    '',
    '"sysid"><injected attr="pwn"/>',
    ''
);
const doc = impl.createDocument(null, 'root', doctype);
console.log(new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc));
// <!DOCTYPE root SYSTEM "sysid"><injected attr="pwn"/>><root/>
// > in sysid closes DOCTYPE early; <injected/> appears as sibling element

Impact

An application that programmatically constructs DocumentType nodes from user-controlled data and
then serializes the document can emit a DOCTYPE declaration where the internal subset is closed
early or where injected SYSTEM entities or other declarations appear in the serialized output.

Downstream XML parsers that re-parse the serialized output and expand entities from the injected
DOCTYPE declarations may be susceptible to XXE-class attacks if they enable entity expansion.

Fix Applied

⚠ Opt-in required. Protection is not automatic. Existing serialization calls remain
vulnerable unless { requireWellFormed: true } is explicitly passed. Applications that pass
untrusted data to createDocumentType() or write untrusted values directly to a
DocumentType node's publicId, systemId, or internalSubset properties should audit
all serializeToString() call sites and add the option.

XMLSerializer.serializeToString() now accepts an options object as a second argument. When { requireWellFormed: true } is passed, the serializer validates the DocumentType node's publicId, systemId, and internalSubset fields before emitting the DOCTYPE declaration and throws InvalidStateError if any field contains an injection sequence:

  • publicId: throws if non-empty and does not match the XML PubidLiteral production (XML 1.0 [12])
  • systemId: throws if non-empty and does not match the XML SystemLiteral production (XML 1.0 [11])
  • internalSubset: throws if it contains ]> (which closes the internal subset and DOCTYPE declaration early)

All three checks apply regardless of how the invalid value entered the node — whether via createDocumentType arguments or a subsequent direct property write.

PoC — fixed path

const { DOMImplementation, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');
const impl = new DOMImplementation();

// internalSubset injection
const dt1 = impl.createDocumentType('root', '', '', ']><injected/><![CDATA[');
const doc1 = impl.createDocument(null, 'root', dt1);

// Default (unchanged): verbatim — injection present
console.log(new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc1));
// <!DOCTYPE root []><injected/><![CDATA[]><root/>

// Opt-in guard: throws InvalidStateError
try {
  new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc1, { requireWellFormed: true });
} catch (e) {
  console.log(e.name, e.message);
  // InvalidStateError: DocumentType internalSubset contains "]>"
}

The guard also covers post-creation property writes:

const dt2 = impl.createDocumentType('root', '', '');
dt2.systemId = '"sysid"><injected attr="pwn"/>';
const doc2 = impl.createDocument(null, 'root', dt2);
new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc2, { requireWellFormed: true });
// InvalidStateError: DocumentType systemId is not a valid SystemLiteral

Why the default stays verbatim

The W3C DOM Parsing and Serialization spec §3.2.1.3 defines a require well-formed flag whose default value is false. With the flag unset, the spec permits verbatim serialization of DOCTYPE fields. Unconditionally throwing would be a behavioral breaking change with no spec justification. The opt-in requireWellFormed: true flag allows applications that require injection safety to enable strict mode without breaking existing deployments.

Residual limitation

createDocumentType(qualifiedName, publicId, systemId[, internalSubset]) does not validate publicId, systemId, or internalSubset at creation time. This creation-time validation is a breaking change and is deferred to a future breaking release.

When the default serialization path is used (without requireWellFormed: true), all three fields are still emitted verbatim. Applications that do not pass requireWellFormed: true remain exposed.

References

@karfau karfau published to xmldom/xmldom Apr 18, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 22, 2026
Reviewed Apr 22, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 7, 2026
Last updated May 8, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(38th percentile)

Weaknesses

XML Injection (aka Blind XPath Injection)

The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-41674

GHSA ID

GHSA-f6ww-3ggp-fr8h

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.