VulnerabilityPublished 24 Sep 2025Updated 5 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-57353: messageformat package · Prototype Pollution

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 3.0.2 : update Node.js when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 27% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Node.js before 3.0.2
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.0.2

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade the messageformat package to version 3.0.2 or later where the vulnerability is fixed. In the absence of an official patch, developers should implement input validation to sanitize and restrict nested message keys, preventing prototype chain manipulation. Conduct thorough code reviews focusing on message data processing and object prototype usage. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or web application firewalls (WAFs) configured to detect and block suspicious payloads targeting prototype pollution. Monitor application logs for anomalies indicative of prototype pollution attempts. Additionally, integrate dependency scanning tools into CI/CD pipelines to detect vulnerable package versions automatically. Educate development teams about prototype pollution risks and secure coding practices related to object manipulation in JavaScript. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any exploitation attempts.

Description

The Runtime components of messageformat package for Node.js before 3.0.2 contain a prototype pollution vulnerability. Due to insufficient validation of nested message keys during the processing of message data, an attacker can manipulate the prototype chain of JavaScript objects by providing specially crafted input. This can result in the injection of arbitrary properties into the Object.prototype, potentially leading to denial of service conditions or unexpected application behavior. The vulnerability allows attackers to alter the prototype of base objects, impacting all subsequent object instances throughout the application's lifecycle.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could disrupt Node.js applications that utilize the messageformat package for message formatting or internationalization. Exploitation could lead to denial of service or erratic application behavior, impacting service availability and reliability. While the confidentiality and integrity impacts are limited, the availability and trustworthiness of affected applications may be compromised, potentially affecting customer-facing services or internal tools. Organizations in sectors with high reliance on web applications, such as finance, e-commerce, and public services, could face operational disruptions. Additionally, prototype pollution vulnerabilities can sometimes be chained with other exploits to escalate attacks, increasing risk. The medium CVSS score suggests moderate urgency, but proactive mitigation is essential to prevent exploitation, especially given the ease of remote exploitation without authentication or user interaction.

CWE-1321Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution') (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies attributes that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control modifications of attributes of the object prototype.
Implementation
By freezing the object prototype first (for example, Object.freeze(Object.prototype)), modification of the prototype becomes impossible.
Architecture and Design
By blocking modifications of attributes that resolve to object prototype, such as proto or prototype, this weakness can be mitigated.
Implementation · Input Validation
When handling untrusted objects, validating using a schema can be used.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Nov 2025, 05:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1321

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats