GHSA-X94G-W73Q-HPCW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-27 21:07 – Updated: 2026-10-27 21:07Summary
A regular expression used to obfuscate URL query strings can consume excessive CPU when processing certain attacker-controlled input. This can stall request processing and cause denial of service in applications using affected HTTP tracing integrations.
Details
The default query-string obfuscation pattern can exhibit excessive backtracking. The pattern is applied synchronously when recording HTTP URL metadata, allowing query-string processing to occupy application resources for an extended period.
As a workaround, set DD_TRACE_OBFUSCATION_QUERY_STRING_REGEXP to the fixed regex below, then restart the application.
DD_TRACE_OBFUSCATION_QUERY_STRING_REGEXP='(?:(?:"|%22)?)(?:(?:old[-_]?|new[-_]?)?p(?:ass)?w(?:or)?d(?:1|2)?|pass(?:[-_]?phrase)?|secret|(?:api[-_]?|private[-_]?|public[-_]?|access[-_]?|secret[-_]?|app(?:lication)?[-_]?)key(?:[-_]?id)?|token|consumer[-_]?(?:id|key|secret)|sign(?:ed|ature)?|auth(?:entication|orization)?)(?:(?:\s|%20)*(?:=|%3D)[^&]+|(?:"|%22)(?:\s|%20)*(?::|%3A)(?:\s|%20)*(?:"|%22)(?:%2[^2]|%[^2]|[^"%])+(?:"|%22))|(?:bearer(?:\s|%20)+[a-z0-9._\-]+|token(?::|%3A)[a-z0-9]{13}|gh[opsu]_[0-9a-zA-Z]{36}|(?:(?<![\w-])|(?<=%[0-9a-f]{2}))ey[I-L][\w-]+(?:=|%3D)*\.ey[I-L][\w-]+(?:=|%3D)*(?:\.(?:[\w.+/=-]|%3D|%2F|%2B)+)?|-{5}BEGIN(?:[a-z\s]|%20)+PRIVATE(?:\s|%20)KEY-{5}[^\-]+-{5}END(?:[a-z\s]|%20)+PRIVATE(?:\s|%20)KEY(?:-{5})?(?:\n|%0A)?|(?:ssh-(?:rsa|dss)|ecdsa-[a-z0-9]+-[a-z0-9]+)(?:\s|%20|%09)+(?:[a-z0-9/.+]|%2F|%5C|%2B){100,}(?:=|%3D)*(?:(?:\s|%20|%09)+[a-z0-9._-]+)?)'
Proof of concept
Detailed triggering inputs and reproduction steps are omitted from this advisory. The patched version includes regression coverage for the affected behavior.
Impact
Regular expression denial of service (ReDoS) affecting applications that process attacker-controlled URL query strings through the vulnerable obfuscation pattern. Successful exploitation can cause excessive CPU consumption, prolonged request latency, and service unavailability.
The vulnerable processing is enabled by default for affected HTTP integrations that include query strings in URL span tags.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "dd-trace"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.131.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "dd-trace"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.20.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-116693"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1333"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-10-27T21:07:25Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nA regular expression used to obfuscate URL query strings can consume excessive CPU when processing certain attacker-controlled input. This can stall request processing and cause denial of service in applications using affected HTTP tracing integrations.\n\n### Details\n\nThe default query-string obfuscation pattern can exhibit excessive backtracking. The pattern is applied synchronously when recording HTTP URL metadata, allowing query-string processing to occupy application resources for an extended period.\n\nAs a workaround, set DD_TRACE_OBFUSCATION_QUERY_STRING_REGEXP to the fixed regex below, then restart the application.\n\n```\nDD_TRACE_OBFUSCATION_QUERY_STRING_REGEXP=\u0027(?:(?:\"|%22)?)(?:(?:old[-_]?|new[-_]?)?p(?:ass)?w(?:or)?d(?:1|2)?|pass(?:[-_]?phrase)?|secret|(?:api[-_]?|private[-_]?|public[-_]?|access[-_]?|secret[-_]?|app(?:lication)?[-_]?)key(?:[-_]?id)?|token|consumer[-_]?(?:id|key|secret)|sign(?:ed|ature)?|auth(?:entication|orization)?)(?:(?:\\s|%20)*(?:=|%3D)[^\u0026]+|(?:\"|%22)(?:\\s|%20)*(?::|%3A)(?:\\s|%20)*(?:\"|%22)(?:%2[^2]|%[^2]|[^\"%])+(?:\"|%22))|(?:bearer(?:\\s|%20)+[a-z0-9._\\-]+|token(?::|%3A)[a-z0-9]{13}|gh[opsu]_[0-9a-zA-Z]{36}|(?:(?\u003c![\\w-])|(?\u003c=%[0-9a-f]{2}))ey[I-L][\\w-]+(?:=|%3D)*\\.ey[I-L][\\w-]+(?:=|%3D)*(?:\\.(?:[\\w.+/=-]|%3D|%2F|%2B)+)?|-{5}BEGIN(?:[a-z\\s]|%20)+PRIVATE(?:\\s|%20)KEY-{5}[^\\-]+-{5}END(?:[a-z\\s]|%20)+PRIVATE(?:\\s|%20)KEY(?:-{5})?(?:\\n|%0A)?|(?:ssh-(?:rsa|dss)|ecdsa-[a-z0-9]+-[a-z0-9]+)(?:\\s|%20|%09)+(?:[a-z0-9/.+]|%2F|%5C|%2B){100,}(?:=|%3D)*(?:(?:\\s|%20|%09)+[a-z0-9._-]+)?)\u0027\n```\n\n### Proof of concept\n\nDetailed triggering inputs and reproduction steps are omitted from this advisory. The patched version includes regression coverage for the affected behavior.\n\n### Impact\n\nRegular expression denial of service (ReDoS) affecting applications that process attacker-controlled URL query strings through the vulnerable obfuscation pattern. Successful exploitation can cause excessive CPU consumption, prolonged request latency, and service unavailability.\n\nThe vulnerable processing is enabled by default for affected HTTP integrations that include query strings in URL span tags.",
"id": "GHSA-x94g-w73q-hpcw",
"modified": "2026-10-27T21:07:25Z",
"published": "2026-10-27T21:07:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/security/advisories/GHSA-x94g-w73q-hpcw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/pull/10675"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/commit/5eeee790c93036a50549056fc890028cb4c86b1b"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/commit/cf4e68a45fa1442c9850f2086c81901258e821b8"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/releases/tag/v5.131.1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/releases/tag/v6.20.1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "dd-trace: ReDOS in URL query string obfuscation"
}
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.
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
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…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
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.