Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
📦 npm
Not in CISA KEV

GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp

GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp is a CWE-697 vulnerability in dompurify. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

DOMPurify's ADD_TAGS function form bypasses FORBID_TAGS due to short-circuit evaluation

Also known asCVE-2026-65903
Published
Apr 16, 2026
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Aug 12, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs10th percentile — riskier than 10% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.23%0.47%0.70%0.2%0.2%Aug 26Aug 26

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

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.

5Kother npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream
dompurifynpm
61.8Mdownloads / week

Description

Summary

In src/purify.ts:1117-1123, ADD_TAGS as a function (via EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck) bypasses FORBID_TAGS due to short-circuit evaluation.

The condition:

!(tagCheck(tagName)) && (!ALLOWED_TAGS[tagName] || FORBID_TAGS[tagName])

When tagCheck(tagName) returns true, the entire condition is false and the element is kept — FORBID_TAGS[tagName] is never evaluated.

Inconsistency

This contradicts the attribute-side pattern at line 1214 where FORBID_ATTR explicitly wins first:

if (FORBID_ATTR[lcName]) { continue; }

For tags, FORBID should also take precedence over ADD.

Impact

Applications using both ADD_TAGS as a function and FORBID_TAGS simultaneously get unexpected behavior — forbidden tags are allowed through. Config-dependent but a genuine logic inconsistency.

Suggested Fix

Check FORBID_TAGS before tagCheck:

if (FORBID_TAGS[tagName]) { /* remove */ }
else if (tagCheck(tagName) || ALLOWED_TAGS[tagName]) { /* keep */ }

Affected Version

v3.3.3 (commit 883ac15)

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
📦npmdompurifyall versions3.4.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for dompurify. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update dompurify to 3.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary In `src/purify.ts:1117-1123`, `ADD_TAGS` as a function (via `EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck`) bypasses `FORBID_TAGS` due to short-circuit evaluation. The condition: ``` !(tagCheck(tagName)) && (!ALLOWED_TAGS[tagName] || FORBID_TAGS[tagName]) ``` When `tagCheck(tagName)` returns `true`, the entire condition is `false` and the element is kept — `FORBID_TAGS[tagName]` is never evaluated. ## Inconsistency This contradicts the attribute-side pattern at line 1214 where `FORBID_ATTR` explicitly wins first: ``` if (FORBID_ATTR[lcName]) { continue; } ``` For tags, FORBID should also take
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp across npm dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-39q2-94rc-95cp: dompurify | O3 Security