GHSA-356W-63V5-8WF4

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-11 14:06 – Updated: 2025-04-11 14:06
VLAI
Summary
Vite has an `server.fs.deny` bypass with an invalid `request-target`
Details

Summary

The contents of arbitrary files can be returned to the browser if the dev server is running on Node or Bun.

Impact

Only apps with the following conditions are affected.

  • explicitly exposing the Vite dev server to the network (using --host or server.host config option)
  • running the Vite dev server on runtimes that are not Deno (e.g. Node, Bun)

Details

HTTP 1.1 spec (RFC 9112) does not allow # in request-target. Although an attacker can send such a request. For those requests with an invalid request-line (it includes request-target), the spec recommends to reject them with 400 or 301. The same can be said for HTTP 2 (ref1, ref2, ref3).

On Node and Bun, those requests are not rejected internally and is passed to the user land. For those requests, the value of http.IncomingMessage.url contains #. Vite assumed req.url won't contain # when checking server.fs.deny, allowing those kinds of requests to bypass the check.

On Deno, those requests are not rejected internally and is passed to the user land as well. But for those requests, the value of http.IncomingMessage.url did not contain #.

PoC

npm create vite@latest
cd vite-project/
npm install
npm run dev

send request to read /etc/passwd

curl --request-target /@fs/Users/doggy/Desktop/vite-project/#/../../../../../etc/passwd http://127.0.0.1:5173
Severity
6.0 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vite"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "6.2.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.2.6"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vite"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "6.1.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.1.5"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vite"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "6.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.0.15"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vite"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.4.18"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vite"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.5.13"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-32395"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-200"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-04-11T14:06:03Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-04-10T14:15:29Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nThe contents of arbitrary files can be returned to the browser if the dev server is running on Node or Bun.\n\n### Impact\nOnly apps with the following conditions are affected.\n\n- explicitly exposing the Vite dev server to the network (using --host or [server.host config option](https://vitejs.dev/config/server-options.html#server-host))\n- running the Vite dev server on runtimes that are not Deno (e.g. Node, Bun)\n\n### Details\n\n[HTTP 1.1 spec (RFC 9112) does not allow `#` in `request-target`](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9112#section-3.2). Although an attacker can send such a request. For those requests with an invalid `request-line` (it includes `request-target`), the spec [recommends to reject them with 400 or 301](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9112#section-3.2-4). The same can be said for HTTP 2 ([ref1](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9113#section-8.3.1-2.4.1), [ref2](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9113#section-8.3.1-3), [ref3](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9113#section-8.1.1-3)).\n\nOn Node and Bun, those requests are not rejected internally and is passed to the user land. For those requests, the value of [`http.IncomingMessage.url`](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v22.x/api/http.html#messageurl) contains `#`. Vite assumed `req.url` won\u0027t contain `#` when checking `server.fs.deny`, allowing those kinds of requests to bypass the check.\n\nOn Deno, those requests are not rejected internally and is passed to the user land as well. But for those requests, the value of `http.IncomingMessage.url` did not contain `#`. \n\n### PoC\n```\nnpm create vite@latest\ncd vite-project/\nnpm install\nnpm run dev\n```\nsend request to read `/etc/passwd`\n```\ncurl --request-target /@fs/Users/doggy/Desktop/vite-project/#/../../../../../etc/passwd http://127.0.0.1:5173\n```",
  "id": "GHSA-356w-63v5-8wf4",
  "modified": "2025-04-11T14:06:03Z",
  "published": "2025-04-11T14:06:03Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/vitejs/vite/security/advisories/GHSA-356w-63v5-8wf4"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-32395"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/vitejs/vite/commit/175a83909f02d3b554452a7bd02b9f340cdfef70"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/vitejs/vite"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Vite has an `server.fs.deny` bypass with an invalid `request-target`"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.