GHSA-qq9g-96v4-m3cj — @pdfme/schemas
MEDIUMGHSA-qq9g-96v4-m3cj is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.1) Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in @pdfme/schemas. A fix is available for @pdfme/schemas — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Select Schema Option Value Injection in @pdfme/schemas
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-qq9g-96v4-m3cj.
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-qq9g-96v4-m3cj 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 376,715 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.
@pdfme/schemasnpmDescription
Summary
The Select schema plugin in @pdfme/schemas constructs HTML from template-defined option values using unsanitized string interpolation and sets it via innerHTML, enabling arbitrary JavaScript execution.
Details
In packages/schemas/src/select/index.ts, lines 159-164, the Select schema's ui renderer builds <option> elements by directly interpolating option values from the template into an HTML string:
const options = Array.isArray(schema.options) ? schema.options : [];
selectElement.innerHTML = options
.map(
(option) =>
`<option value="${option}" ${option === value ? 'selected' : ''}>${option}</option>`,
)
.join('');
The option values come from schema.options, which is an array of strings defined in the template JSON. These values are interpolated directly into the HTML string without any escaping of <, >, ", &, or other HTML-special characters. An option value containing "> breaks out of the value attribute and allows injection of arbitrary HTML elements and event handlers.
Proof of Concept
Loading the following template into a pdfme Form or Designer component triggers JavaScript execution:
{
"basePdf": { "width": 210, "height": 297, "padding": [20, 20, 20, 20] },
"schemas": [[
{
"name": "malicious_select",
"type": "select",
"content": "Normal",
"options": [
"Normal",
"\"></option><img src=x onerror=\"alert(document.domain)\">"
],
"position": { "x": 20, "y": 20 },
"width": 80,
"height": 10
}
]]
}
The injected <img onerror> element executes JavaScript because it is parsed as HTML when assigned to selectElement.innerHTML.
Attack Vectors
The options array is defined in the template (not by form-filling end users). The attack requires a malicious template to be loaded, which can happen via:
- File upload (e.g., "Load Template" functionality in applications)
- Shared/imported templates in multi-tenant applications
- Templates stored in databases without content sanitization
- The
updateTemplate()API being called with untrusted data
This vulnerability is triggered in Form mode (for non-readOnly select fields) and Designer mode when the select element is rendered.
Impact
An attacker who can supply a malicious template can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the browser of any user who views or interacts with the template. This enables:
- Session hijacking via cookie/token theft
- Keylogging of form input data
- Phishing and page modification
- Data exfiltration
Suggested Fix
Use DOM APIs to create option elements safely instead of string interpolation:
options.forEach((option) => {
const optionEl = document.createElement('option');
optionEl.value = option;
optionEl.textContent = option;
if (option === value) optionEl.selected = true;
selectElement.appendChild(optionEl);
});
Alternatively, HTML-encode option values before interpolation:
const escape = (s) => s.replace(/&/g, '&').replace(/"/g, '"').replace(/</g, '<').replace(/>/g, '>');
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | @pdfme/schemas | all versions | 5.5.9npm install @pdfme/schemas@5.5.9 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @pdfme/schemas, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update @pdfme/schemas to 5.5.9 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-qq9g-96v4-m3cj 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-qq9g-96v4-m3cj can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-qq9g-96v4-m3cj. 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-qq9g-96v4-m3cj in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-qq9g-96v4-m3cj across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.