How severe is GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x?

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x has a CVSS score of 7.5/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x?

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x affects the following packages: @dcl/single-sign-on-client (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x?

Update @dcl/single-sign-on-client to 0.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x in my npm dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @dcl/single-sign-on-client, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

Escape or sanitise the affected output on the server side rather than relying on client-side filtering, and add a Content-Security-Policy that blocks inline script execution so injected markup cannot run even if it reaches the page.

Is GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x?

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.5%, placing it in the 39th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x?

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x is classified as Cross-site Scripting (XSS) (CWE-79). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation. This is a high-impact weakness class that often enables remote code execution or data exposure.

When was GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x was published on September 4, 2023 and was last updated on September 10, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

📦

📦 npm

Not in CISA KEV

HIGH severity

Improper Neutralization of Script in Attributes in @dcl/single-sign-on-clientGHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x

HIGHFix: decentraland/single-sign-on-client#2

GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in @dcl/single-sign-on-client. A fix is available for @dcl/single-sign-on-client — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2023-41049

Published

Sep 4, 2023

Updated

Sep 10, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Oct 21, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
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-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs39th percentile — riskier than 39% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

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.

3other npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream

@dcl/single-sign-on-clientnpm

834downloads / week

Description

Impact

Improper input validation in the init function allows arbitrary javascript to be executed using the javascript: prefix

    SSO.init('javascript:alert("javascript successfully injected")')

Patches

This vulnerability was patched on version 0.1.0

Workarounds

This vulnerability can be prevented if user input correctly sanitized or there is no user input pass to the init function

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`@dcl/single-sign-on-client`	all versions	0.1.0`npm install @dcl/single-sign-on-client@0.1.0`

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations

Application

single sign on clientdecentraland

< 0.1.0

range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @dcl/single-sign-on-client, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update @dcl/single-sign-on-client to 0.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-vp4f-wxgw-7x8x is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Escape or sanitise the affected output on the server side rather than relying on client-side filtering, and add a Content-Security-Policy that blocks inline script execution so injected markup cannot run even if it reaches the page.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact Improper input validation in the `init` function allows arbitrary javascript to be executed using the `javascript:` prefix ```ts SSO.init('javascript:alert("javascript successfully injected")') ``` ### Patches This vulnerability was patched on version `0.1.0` ### Workarounds This vulnerability can be prevented if user input correctly sanitized or there is no user input pass to the `init` function