GHSA-h452-7996-h45h is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-1333 vulnerability in org.webjars.npm:cookiejar. 2 public exploit references exist, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for org.webjars.npm:cookiejar — see the affected versions and patch details below.
cookiejar Regular Expression Denial of Service via Cookie.parse function
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 GHSA-h452-7996-h45h.
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-h452-7996-h45h 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 377,166 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.
cookiejarnpmDescription
Versions of the package cookiejar before 2.1.4 are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the Cookie.parse function and other aspects of the API, which use an insecure regular expression for parsing cookie values. Applications could be stalled for extended periods of time if untrusted input is passed to cookie values or attempted to parse from request headers.
Proof of concept:
ts\nconst { CookieJar } = require("cookiejar");
const jar = new CookieJar();
const start = performance.now();
const attack = "a" + "t".repeat(50_000);
jar.setCookie(attack);
console.log(`CookieJar.setCookie(): ${performance.now() - start}ms`);
CookieJar.setCookie(): 2963.214399999939ms
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| ☕Maven | org.webjars.npm:cookiejar | all versions | No fix |
| 📦npm | cookiejar | all versions | 2.1.4npm install cookiejar@2.1.4 |
Research use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for org.webjars.npm:cookiejar, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
No patched version of org.webjars.npm:cookiejar has shipped for GHSA-h452-7996-h45h yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.
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-h452-7996-h45h can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-h452-7996-h45h. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-h452-7996-h45h in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-h452-7996-h45h across Maven, npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.