1. Home
  2. Vulnerabilities
  3. CVE-2025-15284
8.7
HIGH CVSS 4.0
CVE-2025-15284
arrayLimit bypass in bracket notation allows DoS via memory exhaustion
Description

Improper Input Validation vulnerability in qs (parse modules) allows HTTP DoS.This issue affects qs: < 6.14.1. SummaryThe arrayLimit option in qs does not enforce limits for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2), allowing attackers to cause denial-of-service via memory exhaustion. Applications using arrayLimit for DoS protection are vulnerable. DetailsThe arrayLimit option only checks limits for indexed notation (a[0]=1&a[1]=2) but completely bypasses it for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2). Vulnerable code (lib/parse.js:159-162): if (root === '[]' && options.parseArrays) { obj = utils.combine([], leaf); // No arrayLimit check } Working code (lib/parse.js:175): else if (index <= options.arrayLimit) { // Limit checked here obj = []; obj[index] = leaf; } The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses utils.combine([], leaf) without validating against options.arrayLimit, while indexed notation at line 175 checks index <= options.arrayLimit before creating arrays. PoCTest 1 - Basic bypass: npm install qs const qs = require('qs'); const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&a[]=2&a[]=3&a[]=4&a[]=5&a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 6 (should be max 5) Test 2 - DoS demonstration: const qs = require('qs'); const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]='); const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100) Configuration: * arrayLimit: 5 (test 1) or arrayLimit: 100 (test 2) * Use bracket notation: a[]=value (not indexed a[0]=value) ImpactDenial of Service via memory exhaustion. Affects applications using qs.parse() with user-controlled input and arrayLimit for protection. Attack scenario: * Attacker sends HTTP request: GET /api/search?filters[]=x&filters[]=x&...&filters[]=x (100,000+ times) * Application parses with qs.parse(query, { arrayLimit: 100 }) * qs ignores limit, parses all 100,000 elements into array * Server memory exhausted → application crashes or becomes unresponsive * Service unavailable for all users Real-world impact: * Single malicious request can crash server * No authentication required * Easy to automate and scale * Affects any endpoint parsing query strings with bracket notation

INFO

Published Date :

Dec. 29, 2025, 11:15 p.m.

Last Modified :

Dec. 29, 2025, 11:15 p.m.

Remotely Exploit :

Yes !

Source :

7ffcee3d-2c14-4c3e-b844-86c6a321a158
Affected Products

The following products are affected by CVE-2025-15284 vulnerability. Even if cvefeed.io is aware of the exact versions of the products that are affected, the information is not represented in the table below.

No affected product recoded yet

: Total Affected Vendor : 0 | Products : 0
CVSS Scores
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardized framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and displays CVSS scores from various sources for each CVE.
Score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Score Impact Score Source
CVSS 3.1 HIGH 7ffcee3d-2c14-4c3e-b844-86c6a321a158
CVSS 4.0 HIGH 7ffcee3d-2c14-4c3e-b844-86c6a321a158
CVSS 4.0 HIGH 7ffcee3d-2c14-4c3e-b844-86c6a321a158
Solution
Update the qs module to version 6.14.1 or later to fix a denial-of-service vulnerability.
  • Update the qs module to version 6.14.1 or later.
  • Ensure arrayLimit is properly enforced.
  • Avoid parsing untrusted input with bracket notation.
  • Implement input validation on query string parameters.
Public PoC/Exploit Available at Github

CVE-2025-15284 has a 1 public PoC/Exploit available at Github. Go to the Public Exploits tab to see the list.

References to Advisories, Solutions, and Tools

Here, you will find a curated list of external links that provide in-depth information, practical solutions, and valuable tools related to CVE-2025-15284.

URL Resource
https://github.com/ljharb/qs/commit/3086902ecf7f088d0d1803887643ac6c03d415b9
https://github.com/ljharb/qs/security/advisories/GHSA-6rw7-vpxm-498p
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration

While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes the common flaws or weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2025-15284 is associated with the following CWEs:

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2025-15284 weaknesses.

CAPEC-3: Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters CAPEC-7: Blind SQL Injection Blind SQL Injection CAPEC-8: Buffer Overflow in an API Call Buffer Overflow in an API Call CAPEC-9: Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line Utilities Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line Utilities CAPEC-10: Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables CAPEC-13: Subverting Environment Variable Values Subverting Environment Variable Values CAPEC-14: Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client Exploiting Trust in Client CAPEC-23: File Content Injection File Content Injection CAPEC-24: Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow CAPEC-28: Fuzzing Fuzzing CAPEC-31: Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies CAPEC-42: MIME Conversion MIME Conversion CAPEC-43: Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers CAPEC-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links CAPEC-46: Overflow Variables and Tags Overflow Variables and Tags CAPEC-47: Buffer Overflow via Parameter Expansion Buffer Overflow via Parameter Expansion CAPEC-52: Embedding NULL Bytes Embedding NULL Bytes CAPEC-53: Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash CAPEC-63: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) CAPEC-64: Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic CAPEC-67: String Format Overflow in syslog() String Format Overflow in syslog() CAPEC-71: Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic CAPEC-72: URL Encoding URL Encoding CAPEC-73: User-Controlled Filename User-Controlled Filename CAPEC-78: Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding CAPEC-79: Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding CAPEC-80: Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic CAPEC-81: Web Server Logs Tampering Web Server Logs Tampering CAPEC-83: XPath Injection XPath Injection CAPEC-85: AJAX Footprinting AJAX Footprinting CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection OS Command Injection CAPEC-101: Server Side Include (SSI) Injection Server Side Include (SSI) Injection CAPEC-104: Cross Zone Scripting Cross Zone Scripting CAPEC-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection Command Line Execution through SQL Injection CAPEC-109: Object Relational Mapping Injection Object Relational Mapping Injection CAPEC-110: SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering CAPEC-120: Double Encoding Double Encoding CAPEC-135: Format String Injection Format String Injection CAPEC-136: LDAP Injection LDAP Injection CAPEC-153: Input Data Manipulation Input Data Manipulation CAPEC-182: Flash Injection Flash Injection CAPEC-209: XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch CAPEC-230: Serialized Data with Nested Payloads Serialized Data with Nested Payloads CAPEC-231: Oversized Serialized Data Payloads Oversized Serialized Data Payloads CAPEC-250: XML Injection XML Injection CAPEC-261: Fuzzing for garnering other adjacent user/sensitive data Fuzzing for garnering other adjacent user/sensitive data CAPEC-267: Leverage Alternate Encoding Leverage Alternate Encoding CAPEC-473: Signature Spoof Signature Spoof CAPEC-588: DOM-Based XSS DOM-Based XSS CAPEC-664: Server Side Request Forgery Server Side Request Forgery

We scan GitHub repositories to detect new proof-of-concept exploits. Following list is a collection of public exploits and proof-of-concepts, which have been published on GitHub (sorted by the most recently updated).

Profile Photo
harborist/advisories

CVEs assigned by the Harborist CNA.

Updated: 4 hours, 28 minutes ago
3 stars 0 fork 0 watcher
Born at : Nov. 26, 2024, 8:33 p.m. This repo has been linked 6 different CVEs too.

Results are limited to the first 15 repositories due to potential performance issues.

The following list is the news that have been mention CVE-2025-15284 vulnerability anywhere in the article.

Results are limited to the first 20 news articles due to potential performance issues.

The following table lists the changes that have been made to the CVE-2025-15284 vulnerability over time.

Vulnerability history details can be useful for understanding the evolution of a vulnerability, and for identifying the most recent changes that may impact the vulnerability's severity, exploitability, or other characteristics.

  • New CVE Received by 7ffcee3d-2c14-4c3e-b844-86c6a321a158

    Dec. 29, 2025

    Action Type Old Value New Value
    Added Description Improper Input Validation vulnerability in qs (parse modules) allows HTTP DoS.This issue affects qs: < 6.14.1. SummaryThe arrayLimit option in qs does not enforce limits for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2), allowing attackers to cause denial-of-service via memory exhaustion. Applications using arrayLimit for DoS protection are vulnerable. DetailsThe arrayLimit option only checks limits for indexed notation (a[0]=1&a[1]=2) but completely bypasses it for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2). Vulnerable code (lib/parse.js:159-162): if (root === '[]' && options.parseArrays) { obj = utils.combine([], leaf); // No arrayLimit check } Working code (lib/parse.js:175): else if (index <= options.arrayLimit) { // Limit checked here obj = []; obj[index] = leaf; } The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses utils.combine([], leaf) without validating against options.arrayLimit, while indexed notation at line 175 checks index <= options.arrayLimit before creating arrays. PoCTest 1 - Basic bypass: npm install qs const qs = require('qs'); const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&a[]=2&a[]=3&a[]=4&a[]=5&a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 6 (should be max 5) Test 2 - DoS demonstration: const qs = require('qs'); const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]='); const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100) Configuration: * arrayLimit: 5 (test 1) or arrayLimit: 100 (test 2) * Use bracket notation: a[]=value (not indexed a[0]=value) ImpactDenial of Service via memory exhaustion. Affects applications using qs.parse() with user-controlled input and arrayLimit for protection. Attack scenario: * Attacker sends HTTP request: GET /api/search?filters[]=x&filters[]=x&...&filters[]=x (100,000+ times) * Application parses with qs.parse(query, { arrayLimit: 100 }) * qs ignores limit, parses all 100,000 elements into array * Server memory exhausted → application crashes or becomes unresponsive * Service unavailable for all users Real-world impact: * Single malicious request can crash server * No authentication required * Easy to automate and scale * Affects any endpoint parsing query strings with bracket notation
    Added CVSS V4.0 AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
    Added CVSS V3.1 AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
    Added CWE CWE-20
    Added Reference https://github.com/ljharb/qs/commit/3086902ecf7f088d0d1803887643ac6c03d415b9
    Added Reference https://github.com/ljharb/qs/security/advisories/GHSA-6rw7-vpxm-498p
EPSS is a daily estimate of the probability of exploitation activity being observed over the next 30 days. Following chart shows the EPSS score history of the vulnerability.
Vulnerability Scoring Details
Base CVSS Score: 8.7
Attack Vector
Attack Complexity
Attack Requirements
Privileges Required
User Interaction
VS Confidentiality
VS Integrity
VS Availability
SS Confidentiality
SS Integrity
SS Availability
Base CVSS Score: 7.5
Attack Vector
Attack Complexity
Privileges Required
User Interaction
Scope
Confidentiality Impact
Integrity Impact
Availability Impact