CVE-2026-41238 — dompurify
MEDIUMCVE-2026-41238 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.9) Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in dompurify. A fix is available for dompurify — see the affected versions and patch details below.
DOMPurify: Prototype Pollution to XSS Bypass via CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING Fallback
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.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-41238.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
Where this sits among everything scored
Real-World Exposure
How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.
dompurifynpmDescription
Summary
DOMPurify versions 3.0.1 through 3.3.3 (latest) are vulnerable to a prototype pollution-based XSS bypass. When an application uses DOMPurify.sanitize() with the default configuration (no CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING option), a prior prototype pollution gadget can inject permissive tagNameCheck and attributeNameCheck regex values into Object.prototype, causing DOMPurify to allow arbitrary custom elements with arbitrary attributes — including event handlers — through sanitization.
Affected Versions
- 3.0.1 through 3.3.3 (current latest) — all affected
- 3.0.0 and all 2.x versions — NOT affected (used
Object.create(null)for initialization, no|| {}reassignment) - The vulnerable
|| {}reassignment was introduced in the 3.0.0→3.0.1 refactor - This is distinct from GHSA-cj63-jhhr-wcxv (USE_PROFILES Array.prototype pollution, fixed in 3.3.2)
- This is distinct from CVE-2024-45801 / GHSA-mmhx-hmjr-r674 (__depth prototype pollution, fixed in 3.1.3)
Root Cause
In purify.js at line 590, during config parsing:
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING = cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING || {};
When no CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING is specified in the config (the default usage pattern), cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING is undefined, and the fallback {} is used. This plain object inherits from Object.prototype.
Lines 591-598 then check cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING (the original config property) — which is undefined — so the conditional blocks that would set tagNameCheck and attributeNameCheck from the config are never entered.
As a result, CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagNameCheck and CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING.attributeNameCheck resolve via the prototype chain. If an attacker has polluted Object.prototype.tagNameCheck and Object.prototype.attributeNameCheck with permissive values (e.g., /.*/), these polluted values flow into DOMPurify's custom element validation at lines 973-977 and attribute validation, causing all custom elements and all attributes to be allowed.
Impact
- Attack type: XSS bypass via prototype pollution chain
- Prerequisites: Attacker must have a prototype pollution primitive in the same execution context (e.g., vulnerable version of lodash, jQuery.extend, query-string parser, deep merge utility, or any other PP gadget)
- Config required: Default. No special DOMPurify configuration needed. The standard
DOMPurify.sanitize(userInput)call is affected. - Payload: Any HTML custom element (name containing a hyphen) with event handler attributes survives sanitization
Proof of Concept
// Step 1: Attacker exploits a prototype pollution gadget elsewhere in the application
Object.prototype.tagNameCheck = /.*/;
Object.prototype.attributeNameCheck = /.*/;
// Step 2: Application sanitizes user input with DEFAULT config
const clean = DOMPurify.sanitize('<x-x onfocus=alert(document.cookie) tabindex=0 autofocus>');
// Step 3: "Sanitized" output still contains the event handler
console.log(clean);
// Output: <x-x onfocus="alert(document.cookie)" tabindex="0" autofocus="">
// Step 4: When injected into DOM, XSS executes
document.body.innerHTML = clean; // alert() fires
Tested configurations that are vulnerable:
| Call Pattern | Vulnerable? |
|---|---|
DOMPurify.sanitize(input) | YES |
DOMPurify.sanitize(input, {}) | YES |
DOMPurify.sanitize(input, { CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING: null }) | YES |
DOMPurify.sanitize(input, { CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING: {} }) | NO (explicit object triggers L591 path) |
Suggested Fix
Change line 590 from:
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING = cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING || {};
To:
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING = cfg.CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING || create(null);
The create(null) function (already used elsewhere in DOMPurify, e.g., in clone()) creates an object with no prototype, preventing prototype chain inheritance.
Alternative application-level mitigation:
Applications can protect themselves by always providing an explicit CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING in their config:
DOMPurify.sanitize(input, {
CUSTOM_ELEMENT_HANDLING: {
tagNameCheck: null,
attributeNameCheck: null
}
});
Timeline
- 2026-04-04: Vulnerability discovered during automated DOMPurify fuzzing research (Fermat project)
- 2026-04-04: Confirmed in Chrome browser with DOMPurify 3.3.3
- 2026-04-04: Verified distinct from GHSA-cj63-jhhr-wcxv and CVE-2024-45801
- 2026-04-04: Advisory drafted, responsible disclosure initiated
Credit
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | dompurify | ≥ 3.0.1&&< 3.4.0 | 3.4.0npm install dompurify@3.4.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for dompurify, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update dompurify to 3.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-41238 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Escape or sanitise the affected output on the server side rather than relying on client-side filtering, and add a Content-Security-Policy that blocks inline script execution so injected markup cannot run even if it reaches the page.
Fixing This On Your OS
If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.Source: Red Hat security advisory for CVE-2026-41238 (CC BY 4.0)
| Product | Fixed in | Advisory |
|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Ceph Storage 9.2 | rhceph/rhceph-9-rhel10:1790843527 | RHSA-2026:86618 |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-41238 in your dependencies?
Find it across npm, including transitive dependencies.