VulnerabilityPublished 22 Apr 2026Updated 8 May 2026

CVE-2026-41673: xmldom · Uncontrolled recursion in XML serialization leads to DoS

Affects @xmldom/xmldomSource GCVE Database

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High : upgrade to 0.8.13 soon.

Data as of 27 Oct 2026, 00:07 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

Patch: Available – fixed in 0.8.13, 0.9.10

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: High
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 22 Apr 2026
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

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to 0.8.13; @xmldom/xmldom to 0.9.10.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
npm@xmldom/xmldom	Affected <0.8.13	Fixed in 0.8.13
npm@xmldom/xmldom	Affected >=0.9.0 <0.9.10	Fixed in 0.9.10
npmxmldom	Affected <=0.6.0	Fixed in–

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

Description

## Summary Seven recursive traversals in `lib/dom.js` operate without a depth limit. A sufficiently deeply nested DOM tree causes a `RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded`, crashing the application. **Reported operations:** - `Node.prototype.normalize()` — reported by @praveen-kv (email 2026-04-05) and @KarimTantawey (GHSA-fwmp-8wwc-qhv6, via `DOMParser.parseFromString()`) - `XMLSerializer.serializeToString()` — reported by @Jvr2022 (GHSA-2v35-w6hq-6mfw) and @KarimTantawey (GHSA-j2hf-fqwf-rrjf) **Additionally, discovered in research:** - `Element.getElementsByTagName()` / `getElementsByTagNameNS()` / `getElementsByClassName()` / `getElementById()` - `Node.cloneNode(true)` - `Document.importNode(node, true)` - `node.textContent` (getter) - `Node.isEqualNode(other)` All seven share the same root cause: pure-JavaScript recursive tree traversal with no depth guard. A single deeply nested document (parsed successfully) triggers any or all of these operations. --- ## Details ### Root cause `lib/dom.js` implements DOM tree traversals as depth-first recursive functions. Each level of element nesting adds one JavaScript call frame. The JS engine's call stack is finite; once exhausted, a `RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded` is thrown. This error may not be caught reliably at stack-exhaustion depths because the catch handler itself requires stack frames to execute — especially in async scenarios, where an uncaught `RangeError` inside a callback or promise chain can crash the entire Node.js process. Parsing a deeply nested document **succeeds** — the SAX parser in `lib/sax.js` is iterative. The crash occurs during subsequent operations on the parsed DOM. ### `Node.prototype.normalize()` — reported by @praveen-kv [`lib/dom.js:1296–1308`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L1296-L1308) (main): ```js normalize: function () { var child = this.firstChild; while (child) { var next = child.nextSibling; if (next && next.nodeType == TEXT_NODE && child.nodeType == TEXT_NODE) { this.removeChild(next); child.appendData(next.data); } else { child.normalize(); // recursive call — no depth guard child = next; } } }, ``` Crash threshold (Node.js 18, default stack): ~10,000 levels. ### `XMLSerializer.serializeToString()` — reported by @Jvr2022 [`lib/dom.js:2790–2974`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L2790-L2974) (main): The internal `serializeToString` worker recurses into child nodes at four call sites, each passing a `visibleNamespaces.slice()` copy. The per-frame allocation causes earlier stack exhaustion than `normalize()`. Crash threshold (Node.js 18, default stack): ~5,000 levels. ### Additional recursive entry points All five crash at ~10,000 levels on Node.js 18. | Function | Definition | Public API entry point(s) | Crash depth (Node.js 18) | |-----------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------| | `_visitNode` | [`lib/dom.js:1529`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L1529) | `getElementsByTagName()`, `getElementsByTagNameNS()`, `getElementsByClassName()`, `getElementById()` | ~10,000 levels | | `cloneNode` (module fn) | [`lib/dom.js:3037`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L3037) | `Node.prototype.cloneNode(true)` | ~10,000 levels | | `importNode` (module fn) | [`lib/dom.js:2975`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L2975) | `Document.prototype.importNode(node, true)` | ~10,000 levels | | `getTextContent` (inner fn) | [`lib/dom.js:3130`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L3130) | `node.textContent` (getter) | ~10,000 levels | | `isEqualNode` | [`lib/dom.js:1120`](https://github.com/xmldom/xmldom/blob/9ef2fd297ca527a05ecb11979850317a927cd20c/lib/dom.js#L1120) | `Node.prototype.isEqualNode(other)` | ~10,000 levels | Both active branches (`main` and `release-0.8.x`) are identically affected. The unscoped `xmldom`

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

WeaknessesCWE-674

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats