GHSA-7RX3-28CR-V5WH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-29 15:17 – Updated: 2026-03-29 15:17
VLAI
Summary
Handlebars.js has a Prototype Method Access Control Gap via Missing __lookupSetter__ Blocklist Entry
Details

Summary

The prototype method blocklist in lib/handlebars/internal/proto-access.js blocks constructor, __defineGetter__, __defineSetter__, and __lookupGetter__, but omits the symmetric __lookupSetter__. This omission is only exploitable when the non-default runtime option allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true is explicitly set — in that configuration __lookupSetter__ becomes accessible while its counterparts remain blocked, creating an inconsistent security boundary.

4.6.0 is the version that introduced protoAccessControl and the allowProtoMethodsByDefault runtime option.

Description

In lib/handlebars/internal/proto-access.js:

const methodWhiteList = Object.create(null);
methodWhiteList['constructor']      = false;
methodWhiteList['__defineGetter__'] = false;
methodWhiteList['__defineSetter__'] = false;
methodWhiteList['__lookupGetter__'] = false;
// __lookupSetter__ intentionally blocked in CVE-2021-23383,
// but omitted here — creating an asymmetric blocklist

All four legacy accessor helpers (__defineGetter__, __defineSetter__, __lookupGetter__, __lookupSetter__) were involved in the exploit chain addressed by CVE-2021-23383. Three of the four were explicitly blocked; __lookupSetter__ was left out.

When allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true is set, any prototype method not present in methodWhiteList is permitted by default. Because __lookupSetter__ is absent from the list, it passes the checkWhiteList check and is accessible in templates, while __lookupGetter__ (its sibling) is correctly denied.

Workarounds

  • Do not set allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true. The default configuration is not affected.
  • If allowProtoMethodsByDefault must be enabled, ensure templates do not reference __lookupSetter__ through untrusted input.
Severity
4.8 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.7.8"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "handlebars"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.6.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.7.9"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-1321"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-29T15:17:15Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nThe prototype method blocklist in `lib/handlebars/internal/proto-access.js` blocks `constructor`, `__defineGetter__`, `__defineSetter__`, and `__lookupGetter__`, but omits the symmetric `__lookupSetter__`. This omission is only exploitable when the non-default runtime option `allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true` is explicitly set \u2014 in that configuration `__lookupSetter__` becomes accessible while its counterparts remain blocked, creating an inconsistent security boundary.\n\n`4.6.0` is the version that introduced `protoAccessControl` and the `allowProtoMethodsByDefault` runtime option.\n\n## Description\n\nIn `lib/handlebars/internal/proto-access.js`:\n\n```javascript\nconst methodWhiteList = Object.create(null);\nmethodWhiteList[\u0027constructor\u0027]      = false;\nmethodWhiteList[\u0027__defineGetter__\u0027] = false;\nmethodWhiteList[\u0027__defineSetter__\u0027] = false;\nmethodWhiteList[\u0027__lookupGetter__\u0027] = false;\n// __lookupSetter__ intentionally blocked in CVE-2021-23383,\n// but omitted here \u2014 creating an asymmetric blocklist\n```\n\nAll four legacy accessor helpers (`__defineGetter__`, `__defineSetter__`, `__lookupGetter__`, `__lookupSetter__`) were involved in the exploit chain addressed by CVE-2021-23383. Three of the four were explicitly blocked; `__lookupSetter__` was left out.\n\nWhen `allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true` is set, any prototype method **not present** in `methodWhiteList` is permitted by default. Because `__lookupSetter__` is absent from the list, it passes the `checkWhiteList` check and is accessible in templates, while `__lookupGetter__` (its sibling) is correctly denied.\n\n## Workarounds\n\n- Do **not** set `allowProtoMethodsByDefault: true`. The default configuration is not affected.\n- If `allowProtoMethodsByDefault` must be enabled, ensure templates do not reference  `__lookupSetter__` through untrusted input.",
  "id": "GHSA-7rx3-28cr-v5wh",
  "modified": "2026-03-29T15:17:15Z",
  "published": "2026-03-29T15:17:15Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/handlebars-lang/handlebars.js/security/advisories/GHSA-7rx3-28cr-v5wh"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-765h-qjxv-5f44"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/handlebars-lang/handlebars.js"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/handlebars-lang/handlebars.js/releases/tag/v4.7.9"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Handlebars.js has a Prototype Method Access Control Gap via Missing __lookupSetter__ Blocklist Entry"
}



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.