CWE-174
AllowedDouble Decoding of the Same Data
Abstraction: Variant · Status: Draft
The product decodes the same input twice, which can limit the effectiveness of any protection mechanism that occurs in between the decoding operations.
1 vulnerability references this CWE, most recent first.
CVE-2026-75899 (GCVE-0-2026-75899)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-08-24 09:40 – Updated: 2026-08-24 16:19{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-75899",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-08-24T16:16:34.392088Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-24T16:19:58.701Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"packageURL": "pkg:npm/fast-uri",
"product": "fast-uri",
"vendor": "fast-uri",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "2.4.5",
"status": "affected",
"version": "2.4.1",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "2.4.5",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.1.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.1.2",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "3.1.6",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "4.1.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "4.1.3",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "mcollina"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation reviewer",
"value": "UlisesGascon"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "NotAFlightRisk"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "fast-uri is a URI parser for Node.js. It decodes percent escapes in a hostname during parsing and then decodes the parsed hostname a second time during authority recomposition, so a single call to normalize or resolve can turn nested percent-encoded input into a different network destination such as a loopback hostname or address. For example, a doubly encoded host that spells out a loopback name decodes to that live host in one operation, which contradicts RFC 3986 section 2.4 that an implementation must not decode the same string more than once. An application that normalizes or resolves an untrusted HTTP-family URI before outbound routing, redirect validation, or a host-policy check can receive a destination different from the one the original encoded host represented, giving a server-side request forgery and host-policy bypass primitive. This is an incomplete-fix variant of CVE-2026-6322. The affected versions are 2.4.1 up to but not including 2.4.5, 3.1.2 up to but not including 3.1.6, and 4.0.0 up to but not including 4.1.3. The issue is fixed in 2.4.5, 3.1.6, and 4.1.3, which normalize percent escapes once and preserve encoded percent signs. Users should upgrade to a patched version."
}
],
"value": "fast-uri is a URI parser for Node.js. It decodes percent escapes in a hostname during parsing and then decodes the parsed hostname a second time during authority recomposition, so a single call to normalize or resolve can turn nested percent-encoded input into a different network destination such as a loopback hostname or address. For example, a doubly encoded host that spells out a loopback name decodes to that live host in one operation, which contradicts RFC 3986 section 2.4 that an implementation must not decode the same string more than once. An application that normalizes or resolves an untrusted HTTP-family URI before outbound routing, redirect validation, or a host-policy check can receive a destination different from the one the original encoded host represented, giving a server-side request forgery and host-policy bypass primitive. This is an incomplete-fix variant of CVE-2026-6322. The affected versions are 2.4.1 up to but not including 2.4.5, 3.1.2 up to but not including 3.1.6, and 4.0.0 up to but not including 4.1.3. The issue is fixed in 2.4.5, 3.1.6, and 4.1.3, which normalize percent escapes once and preserve encoded percent signs. Users should upgrade to a patched version."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-174",
"description": "CWE-174: Double Decoding of the Same Data",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-918",
"description": "CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-24T09:40:19.801Z",
"orgId": "ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb",
"shortName": "openjs"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://github.com/fastify/fast-uri/security/advisories/GHSA-fph4-wmhf-6fwf"
},
{
"url": "https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html"
}
],
"title": "fast-uri vulnerable to server-side request forgery via repeated hostname percent-decoding",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "cve-kit 1.0.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb",
"assignerShortName": "openjs",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-75899",
"datePublished": "2026-08-24T09:40:19.801Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-08-18T14:27:47.424Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-24T16:19:58.701Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Mitigation MIT-44
Strategy: Input Validation
Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
Mitigation MIT-30
Strategy: Output Encoding
Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
Mitigation MIT-20
Strategy: Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.
No CAPEC attack patterns related to this CWE.