If a remote attacker was able to control the pretty option of the pug compiler, e.g. if you spread a user provided object such as the query parameters of a request into the pug template inputs, it was possible for them to achieve remote code execution on the node.js backend.
Patches
Upgrade to pug@3.0.1 or pug-code-gen@3.0.2 or pug-code-gen@2.0.3, which correctly sanitise the parameter.
Workarounds
If there is no way for un-trusted input to be passed to pug as the pretty option, e.g. if you compile templates in advance before applying user input to them, you do not need to upgrade.
If you believe you have found other vulnerabilities, please DO NOT open an issue. Instead, you can follow the instructions in our Security Policy
Release Notes
pugjs/pug
### [`v3.0.1`](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/releases/pug@3.0.1)
[Compare Source](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/compare/pug@3.0.0...pug@3.0.1)
#### Bug Fixes
- Sanitise the `pretty` option ([#3314](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/issues/3314))
If a malicious attacker could control the `pretty` option, it was possible for them to achieve remote code execution on the server rendering the template. All pug users should upgrade as soon as possible, see [#3312](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/issues/3312) for more details.
Configuration
📅 Schedule: "" (UTC).
🚦 Automerge: Enabled.
♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.
🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.
[ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, click this checkbox.
This PR contains the following updates:
3.0.0->3.0.1GitHub Vulnerability Alerts
CVE-2021-21353
Impact
If a remote attacker was able to control the
prettyoption of the pug compiler, e.g. if you spread a user provided object such as the query parameters of a request into the pug template inputs, it was possible for them to achieve remote code execution on the node.js backend.Patches
Upgrade to
pug@3.0.1orpug-code-gen@3.0.2orpug-code-gen@2.0.3, which correctly sanitise the parameter.Workarounds
If there is no way for un-trusted input to be passed to pug as the
prettyoption, e.g. if you compile templates in advance before applying user input to them, you do not need to upgrade.References
Original report: https://github.com/pugjs/pug/issues/3312
For more information
If you believe you have found other vulnerabilities, please DO NOT open an issue. Instead, you can follow the instructions in our Security Policy
Release Notes
pugjs/pug
### [`v3.0.1`](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/releases/pug@3.0.1) [Compare Source](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/compare/pug@3.0.0...pug@3.0.1) #### Bug Fixes - Sanitise the `pretty` option ([#3314](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/issues/3314)) If a malicious attacker could control the `pretty` option, it was possible for them to achieve remote code execution on the server rendering the template. All pug users should upgrade as soon as possible, see [#3312](https://togithub.com/pugjs/pug/issues/3312) for more details.Configuration
📅 Schedule: "" (UTC).
🚦 Automerge: Enabled.
♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.
🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.
This PR has been generated by WhiteSource Renovate. View repository job log here.