
Loading

Loading
We use strictly necessary cookies to run this site, and analytics cookies to understand how it's used. See our Privacy Policy for details.
A GitHub-reviewed security advisory, not necessarily under active exploitation the way our CISA KEV advisories are, but a real, disclosed vulnerability in an open-source dependency.
Affected packages
Vulnerable: <= 2.14.1
Patched in 2.14.2
Vulnerable: >= 8.3.0, <= 8.3.2
Patched in 8.3.3
Vulnerable: >= 8.2.0, <= 8.2.3
Patched in 8.2.4
Vulnerable: >= 8.0.0, <= 8.1.5
Patched in 8.1.6
Vulnerable: >= 7.0.0, <= 7.3.6
Patched in 7.3.7
Vulnerable: <= 6.4.3
Patched in 6.4.4
Vulnerable: <= 1.0.0
Patched in 1.1.0
Details
launch-editor checked fs.existsSync(fileName) before passing a supplied path to an editor command. On Windows, an attacker can bypass this check with a crafted path ending in \\..:line:column. This removes the requirement that the attacker be able to place a file with a malicious filename.
Combined with the % escaping issue described in GHSA-698v-4r3x-3vcv, this bypass can lead to OS command injection when an attacker controls the file argument.
Only apps that runs on Windows is affected.
The earlier advisory assumed that fs.existsSync() required an attacker-controlled filename to exist. This advisory covers a bypass of that requirement.
A crafted value ending in \\..:1:1 is interpreted differently by launch-editor-middleware, launch-editor, and Windows:
launch-editor-middleware calls path.resolve() while the final path component is ..:1:1, so it is not treated as a parent-directory component.launch-editor treats :1:1 as a line-and-column suffix and removes it, leaving a path ending in \\...fs.existsSync() accepts the resulting path as the existing parent directory even though the attacker-controlled preceding component does not exist.Talk to us about this
Find out whether this dependency (or others like it) is actually reachable in your codebase.
Get help patching, or building dependency-scanning into your pipeline going forward.
A secure code review or supply chain review finds this before an advisory does.