GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.8) Insufficient Random Values vulnerability in undici. A fix is available for undici — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Use of Insufficiently Random Values in undici
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.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
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.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
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.
undicinpmDescription
Impact
Undici fetch() uses Math.random() to choose the boundary for a multipart/form-data request. It is known that the output of Math.random() can be predicted if several of its generated values are known.
If there is a mechanism in an app that sends multipart requests to an attacker-controlled website, they can use this to leak the necessary values. Therefore, An attacker can tamper with the requests going to the backend APIs if certain conditions are met.
Patches
This is fixed in 5.28.5; 6.21.1; 7.2.3.
Workarounds
Do not issue multipart requests to attacker controlled servers.
References
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | undici | ≥ 4.5.0&&< 5.28.5 | 5.28.5npm install undici@5.28.5 |
| 📦npm | undici | ≥ 6.0.0&&< 6.21.1 | 6.21.1npm install undici@6.21.1 |
| 📦npm | undici | ≥ 7.0.0&&< 7.2.3 | 7.2.3npm install undici@7.2.3 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for undici, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update undici to 5.28.5 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
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.
| Product | Fixed in | Advisory |
|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Developer Hub 1.3 on RHEL 9 | rhdh-hub-container-1.3-142 | RHSA-2025:1454 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | nodejs:20-8100020250203134842.489197e6 | RHSA-2025:1351 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | nodejs:18-8100020250207121904.489197e6 | RHSA-2025:1582 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | nodejs:22-8100020250130144944.6d880403 | RHSA-2025:1611 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | nodejs:20-9050020250130114516.rhel9 | RHSA-2025:1443 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | nodejs:18-9050020250206154514.rhel9 | RHSA-2025:1446 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | nodejs:22-9050020250131131518.rhel9 | RHSA-2025:1613 |
| Red Hat Developer Hub 1.5 | rhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:1.5 | RHSA-2025:3374 |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-c76h-2ccp-4975 across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.