Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-9679

Nodejs Undici ≤ 6.27.0

Published
17 June 2026
Modified
25 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0026 17th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-9679 is a medium-severity CRLF Injection (CWE-93) vulnerability in Nodejs Undici. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 17th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Impact: undici's cookie parser in parseSetCookie percent-decodes cookie values via qsUnescape, turning encoded sequences like %0D%0A, %00, %3B, and %3D into their literal byte equivalents. RFC 6265 §5.4 does not specify any decoding and browsers do not decode either. Applications…

more

that parse a Set-Cookie header and then forward the parsed value into a response header (proxies, middleware, SSR frameworks) become vulnerable to HTTP response header injection: an attacker-controlled upstream can inject arbitrary Set-Cookie, Location, or Cache-Control headers into the application's downstream response, enabling session fixation, open redirect, or cache poisoning. Affected applications are those that use undici's cookie parsing (parseSetCookie, parseCookie, getSetCookies) and forward the parsed cookie value into a response header. This was introduced in undici 7.0.0 via PR #3789. Patches: Upgrade to undici v6.26.0, v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: If upgrade is not immediately possible, do not forward values returned by parseSetCookie/parseCookie/getSetCookies directly into response headers; sanitize the value first to strip or reject CR, LF, NUL, ;, and = bytes.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-1527Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-11525Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-1525Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-1528Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-2229Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2023-24807Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-6734Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-1526Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-12151Same product: Nodejs Undici
CVE-2026-9675Same product: Nodejs Undici

Affected Assets

nodejs
undici
≤ 6.27.0 · 7.0.0 — 7.28.0 · 8.0.0 — 8.5.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V4.2.4

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Input validation directly stops untrusted data containing CRLF sequences from reaching the component that treats CRLF as a delimiter.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and validation to block CRLF injection.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing can detect CRLF flaws but does not itself implement the neutralization.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevents CRLF injection.

prevents

Application security requirements include rules for neutralizing special characters such as CRLF in inputs.

prevents

Secure architecture principles encourage safe handling of untrusted data but do not prescribe specific CRLF controls.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly require neutralization of CRLF sequences, fully addressing this weakness.

References