CVE-2026-107826 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-674 vulnerability in github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3. A fix is available for github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3 — see the affected versions and patch details below.
OWASP Coraza WAF: JSON body processor: argument-limit truncation reopens an unbounded-depth gjson.Valid stack overflow (process crash)
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-107826.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-107826 by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 394,803 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.
Real-World Exposure
github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
The JSON body processor (internal/bodyprocessors/json.go) can be made to
crash the whole process with an unrecoverable fatal error: stack overflow,
using a request body that is well under the recommended SecRequestBodyLimit
and the default SecArgumentsLimit.
Root cause
readJSON (json.go:113-143) runs a bounded, best-effort flattening walk
(readItems) and afterwards calls gjson.Valid(s) on the raw body if
readItems returned no error:
json := gjson.Parse(s)
...
truncated, err = readItems(json, key, maxRecursion, argumentLimit, byteBudget, &usedBytes, &argCount, res)
if err != nil {
return res, truncated, err
}
if !gjson.Valid(s) {
return res, truncated, errors.New("invalid JSON")
}
gjson.Valid (gjson v1.18.0, validany -> validarray/validobject) recurses
once per nesting level with no depth bound. readItems does have a depth
bound (maxRecursion), enforced here (json.go:163-182):
func readItems(json gjson.Result, objKey []byte, maxRecursion int, argumentLimit int, byteBudget int, usedBytes *int, argCount *int, res map[string][]string) (truncated bool, err error) {
if byteBudget > 0 && *usedBytes >= byteBudget {
return true, nil // <-- checked first
}
if argumentLimit > 0 && *argCount >= argumentLimit {
return true, nil // <-- checked second
}
...
if maxRecursion <= 0 {
return false, errors.New("max recursion reached while reading json object")
}
The byte-budget and argument-limit checks run before the recursion-depth
check, and they short-circuit the walk with truncated=true, err=nil instead
of recursing further. If the configured SecArgumentsLimit
(ArgumentLimit, default 1000, internal/corazawaf/waf.go:359) is reached by
earlier, shallow values in the document, readItems stops walking before it
ever reaches a deeply nested tail later in the same document — so the
maxRecursion error is never produced, err comes back nil, and readJSON
falls through to the unconditional gjson.Valid(s) call on the complete raw
body, including the part readItems never visited.
This is not a new interaction with the recursion limit itself: at v3.7.0,
gjson.Valid ran unconditionally before any recursion check at all, so a
plain deeply-nested body crashed the process directly. A later fix added a
depth check that returns an error before Valid runs for the straightforward
case (nesting reached before any other guard fires). The argument-limit /
byte-budget guards added since then (GHSA-6r3q-mjv7-xr8m,
GHSA-3ww9-vw83-9w5x) reopened the same crash for the case above, because they
short-circuit the walk (and therefore the recursion counter) ahead of the
depth check, on both the request and response body path (ProcessResponse
calls the same readJSON, json.go:57-88).
Because this is fatal error: stack overflow, not a panic, it is not
recoverable by any recover() in the calling goroutine — the process
terminates unconditionally.
PoC
package bodyprocessors
import (
"strings"
"testing"
)
func TestStackOverflowRepro(t *testing.T) {
body := "[" + strings.Repeat("1,", 1000) + strings.Repeat("[", 13_000_000)
// 13,002,001 bytes total: under the recommended SecRequestBodyLimit
// (13107200, coraza.conf-recommended:78) and default ArgumentLimit (1000,
// internal/corazawaf/waf.go:359).
_, _, _ = readJSON(body, 20, 1000)
}
$ go test -run TestStackOverflowRepro ./internal/bodyprocessors/ -v
runtime: goroutine stack exceeds 1000000000-byte limit
fatal error: stack overflow
...
github.com/tidwall/gjson.validarray(...)
.../[email protected]/gjson.go:2584
github.com/tidwall/gjson.validany(...)
.../[email protected]/gjson.go:2499
github.com/tidwall/gjson.validarray(...)
.../[email protected]/gjson.go:2589
... (repeats until the goroutine stack limit is hit)
Reproduced against commit 19b86824 (tag v3.8.0), both by calling
readJSON directly and end-to-end through the recommended
coraza.conf-recommended configuration (JSON Content-Type, default
SecArgumentsLimit, recommended SecRequestBodyLimit).
Impact
An unauthenticated attacker who can send an HTTP request body (any endpoint
protected by Coraza with the JSON body processor enabled, which is the
default for application/json) can crash the entire host process with a
single request, using a payload well within default and recommended body
size and argument-count limits. There is no privilege or interaction
requirement, and the crash cannot be caught or mitigated by the integrator
(no recover() stops a stack-overflow fatal error). This is strictly worse
than a CPU-exhaustion or slow-request DoS: the process must be restarted, and
every in-flight request/transaction on that process is lost.
Suggested fix
Run an iterative, explicitly-bounded-depth pre-scan (or reuse readItems's
own recursion accounting) before calling gjson.Valid, and never call
gjson.Valid on input whose nesting exceeds maxRecursion. The response
path (ProcessResponse) needs the same treatment since it shares readJSON.
AI involvement disclosure
- AI tools/models used: Claude Sonnet 5 (Anthropic), via Claude Code.
- What was generated/assisted: the initial vulnerability hypothesis and
repro shape were supplied by the reporter as an existing written finding;
Claude Sonnet 5 independently re-derived the root cause by reading the
current source, wrote and ran a fresh PoC test against commit
19b86824(tagv3.8.0), confirmed the crash and stack trace shown above, verified the default configuration values cited (ArgumentLimitdefault,SecRequestBodyLimitrecommended value) against the current source, and drafted this advisory text. - Review performed: reproduced by hand by running the PoC test above with
go test -run TestStackOverflowRepro ./internal/bodyprocessors/ -vagainst a clean checkout of commit19b86824; observed thefatal error: stack overflowand stack trace throughgjson.validarray/validany; tracedreadJSON/readItemsline by line to confirm the guard ordering described above; the PoC was reviewed by a human maintainer (fzipi) before submission of this advisory.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3 | ≥ 3.0.0&&< 3.8.1 | 3.8.1go get github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3@v3.8.1 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update github.com/corazawaf/coraza/v3 to 3.8.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-107826 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Stop feeding it untrusted input: reject or quarantine files and payloads from unverified sources until you can upgrade, restrict accepted formats to the ones you actually need, and run the parsing or decoding step in a least-privileged sandbox or short-lived worker so a crash or corrupted read cannot reach the rest of the process.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-107826 in your dependencies?
Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.