VulnerabilityPublished 26 Mar 2026Updated 30 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-33532: eemeli yaml · Uncontrolled Recursion

Affects eemeli yamlSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.8.3 or 1.10.3 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 41% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.8.3, 1.10.3

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

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

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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
Public exploit code: GitHub proofs of concept
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), GitHub proofs of concept, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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

Upgrade eemeli yaml to 2.8.3 or 1.10.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
eemeliyaml	Affected >=2.0.0 <2.8.3	Fixed in 2.8.3
eemeliyaml	Affected >=1.0.0 <1.10.3	Fixed in 1.10.3
npmyaml`pkg:npm/yaml`Other threats	Affected <1.10.3 <2.8.3	Fixed in 1.10.3 2.8.3

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

This vulnerability is fixed in eemeli yaml versions 1.10.3 and 2.8.3. Users should upgrade to these or later versions to remediate the issue. There is no indication of alternative mitigations or that the issue is already mitigated without patching. Patch status is confirmed by the vendor's versioning information.

Description

`yaml` is a YAML parser and serialiser for JavaScript. Parsing a YAML document with a version of `yaml` on the 1.x branch prior to 1.10.3 or on the 2.x branch prior to 2.8.3 may throw a RangeError due to a stack overflow. The node resolution/composition phase uses recursive function calls without a depth bound. An attacker who can supply YAML for parsing can trigger a `RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded` with a small payload (~2–10 KB). The `RangeError` is not a `YAMLParseError`, so applications that only catch YAML-specific errors will encounter an unexpected exception type. Depending on the host application's exception handling, this can fail requests or terminate the Node.js process. Flow sequences allow deep nesting with minimal bytes (2 bytes per level: one `[` and one `]`). On the default Node.js stack, approximately 1,000–5,000 levels of nesting (2–10 KB input) exhaust the call stack. The exact threshold is environment-dependent (Node.js version, stack size, call stack depth at invocation). Note: the library's `Parser` (CST phase) uses a stack-based iterative approach and is not affected. Only the compose/resolve phase uses actual call-stack recursion. All three public parsing APIs are affected: `YAML.parse()`, `YAML.parseDocument()`, and `YAML.parseAllDocuments()`. Versions 1.10.3 and 2.8.3 contain a patch.

Impact

An attacker able to supply YAML input to an application using affected versions of the eemeli yaml library can cause a denial of service by triggering a stack overflow and RangeError. This may result in failed requests or termination of the Node.js process depending on how exceptions are handled. There is no impact on confidentiality or integrity, only availability is affected.

Summary

The eemeli yaml library versions 1.x before 1.10.3 and 2.x before 2.8.3 have a vulnerability (CWE-674) where the node resolution/composition phase uses recursive function calls without a depth limit. This can lead to a stack overflow and a RangeError when parsing maliciously crafted YAML documents with deep nesting (approximately 1,000–5,000 levels). The error is not a YAMLParseError, so applications that only catch YAML-specific errors may experience unexpected exceptions, potentially causing request failures or process crashes. The parser phase is unaffected as it uses an iterative approach. The vulnerability is fixed in versions 1.10.3 and 2.8.3.

CWE-674Uncontrolled Recursion (opens in a new tab)
Class weakness
The product does not properly control the amount of recursion that takes place, consuming excessive resources, such as allocated memory or the program stack.
Implementation
Ensure that an end condition will be reached under all logic conditions. The end condition may include checking against the depth of recursion and exiting with an error if the recursion goes too deep. The complexity of the end condition contributes to the effectiveness of this action.
Implementation
Increase the stack size.
Attack patterns
Serialized Data with Nested Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Oversized Serialized Data Payloads (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Apr 2026, 13:12 UTC

Public exploits and detectionGitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-674

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats