Feb 26, 2026·5 min read·83 visits
dottie.js versions 2.0.4-2.0.6 contain a trivial bypass for a previous prototype pollution fix. By using a path like 'key.__proto__.polluted' instead of '__proto__.polluted', attackers can execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service. Fixed in v2.0.7.
A classic example of a failed patch. The popular dottie.js library attempted to fix a prototype pollution vulnerability by blocking malicious keys, but only checked the first segment of the property path. Attackers could simply nest their payload one level deep to bypass the check completely.
JavaScript developers love dot-notation helpers. Why write obj && obj.db && obj.db.config when you can just use dottie.get(obj, 'db.config')? Libraries like dottie.js exist to make accessing and mutating nested objects painless. But as we've seen time and time again in the Node.js ecosystem, convenience often comes at the cost of security.
This isn't a story about a new, groundbreaking exploit technique. It's a story about a "zombie" vulnerability—a bug that was supposedly killed, buried, and marked as fixed, only to crawl back out of the grave because the stake wasn't driven deep enough.
We are looking at CVE-2026-27837, a bypass of the patch for CVE-2023-26132. It highlights a critical lesson in input validation: if you are going to police user input, you have to check the entire payload, not just the first five characters.
To understand the bypass, we have to look at the original fix. In 2023, the maintainers of dottie.js realized that allowing users to set keys like __proto__ was dangerous. It enables Prototype Pollution, where an attacker modifies the base Object.prototype, affecting every object in the Node.js process.
Their solution was logical, but short-sighted. They added a guard clause that looked like this:
// The old, vulnerable check
if (pieces[0] === '__proto__') return;This code splits the input path (e.g., user.name) into an array (['user', 'name']) and checks the first element. If you try to pass __proto__.polluted, pieces[0] is __proto__, and the function returns. The front door is locked.
But the logic flaw here is assuming that the attack vector must be the root of the operation. dottie.js is recursive. It walks down the object tree. If an attacker provides a path like user.__proto__.isAdmin, the array becomes ['user', '__proto__', 'isAdmin'].
Here, pieces[0] is 'user'. The check passes. The library then happily traverses into user, then into __proto__ (which points to Object.prototype), and finally sets isAdmin on the global prototype. The bouncer checked the first guy in line, saw he was cool, and let the entire gang of hackers in behind him.
Exploiting this requires zero advanced knowledge of memory corruption or heap layouts. You just need to shift your malicious payload one index to the right.
Here is a functional Proof of Concept (PoC) demonstrating the bypass:
const dottie = require('dottie');
// A harmless looking object
const payload = {};
// The Attack: We prefix the malicious path with literally anything.
// The check `pieces[0] === '__proto__'` sees 'config' and allows it.
const maliciousPath = 'config.__proto__.polluted';
console.log("Before:", ({}).polluted); // undefined
try {
// dottie traverses 'config' (creates it), then accesses '__proto__',
// then sets 'polluted' on the global Object prototype.
dottie.set(payload, maliciousPath, "pwned");
} catch (e) {
console.log("Blocked?");
}
console.log("After:", ({}).polluted);
// Output: "pwned"
// Every object in the process now has this property.This vulnerability affects both dottie.set() and dottie.transform(). In a real-world scenario, this usually happens when an application takes a JSON body from a request (e.g., updating user preferences) and passes it directly to dottie to update a database object.
Prototype pollution is often dismissed as a "theoretical" risk, but in JavaScript, it is a loaded gun. By polluting Object.prototype, an attacker can:
if (user.isAdmin), and isAdmin is undefined on the user object, it looks up the prototype chain. If the attacker polluted the prototype with isAdmin: true, they are now an admin.toString or valueOf can cause the application to crash instantly whenever it tries to log an object or coerce a string.shell, exec, or outputFunctionName) can trick the engine into executing arbitrary shell commands.With a CVSS score of 6.3, it's marked "Medium," but in the right environment (like a server-side rendering app), it is critical.
The fix in version 2.0.7 replaces the lazy index-0 check with a comprehensive scan of the path. The developers finally realized that any part of the path could be a weapon.
Here is the corrected code logic:
// The Fix: Check EVERY piece of the path
var DANGEROUS_KEYS = ['__proto__', 'constructor', 'prototype'];
// Array.some() returns true if any element matches the condition
if (pieces.some(function(p) {
return DANGEROUS_KEYS.indexOf(p) !== -1;
})) return;They also expanded the blacklist. Previously, they only feared __proto__. Now, they correctly block constructor and prototype as well. This prevents attacks that try to walk up the prototype chain via constructor.prototype.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L| Product | Affected Versions | Fixed Version |
|---|---|---|
dottie.js mickhansen | >= 2.0.4, < 2.0.7 | 2.0.7 |
| Attribute | Detail |
|---|---|
| CWE ID | CWE-1321 (Prototype Pollution) |
| CVSS v3.1 | 6.3 (Medium) |
| Attack Vector | Network (AV:N) |
| Exploit Maturity | Proof of Concept (PoC) |
| User Interaction | None (if automated processing) |
| Complexity | Low (AC:L) |
An uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability exists in the Docling document conversion library. Maliciously structured HTML, JATS, ODS, or BoxNote inputs containing table cells with excessively large 'rowspan' or 'colspan' attribute values trigger algorithmic complexity conditions. This allows unauthenticated remote attackers to initiate resource exhaustion states, crashing or hanging the target document processing pipeline while bypassing configured timeouts.
A Local File Inclusion (LFI) and Arbitrary File Disclosure vulnerability exists in Docling and Docling Slim versions >= 2.16.0 up to 2.131.0. When parsing serialized DoclingDocument structures using the JSON input format, the backend fails to restrict image URI schemes, allowing remote attackers to retrieve local files and verify path existence on the host system during embedded document export.
Docling, a tool for parsing and processing diverse document formats, is vulnerable to arbitrary file read, arbitrary file write, and potential remote code execution (RCE) in versions 2.94.0 through 2.131.0. The vulnerability occurs when applications configure Docling to use the Tectonic engine for rendering TikZ diagrams into images. Because the compilation did not restrict hazardous TeX primitives or sandbox the environment, an attacker can supply crafted documents containing malicious TikZ definitions to access or modify local files and execute arbitrary commands under the privileges of the processing application.
An SSRF guard bypass vulnerability in the Docling document conversion engine allows unauthenticated attackers to bypass internal IP access controls. The vulnerability exists due to a DNS rebinding Time-of-Check Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) condition, URL authority parsing inconsistencies, and unvalidated network requests triggered during headless browser page rendering.
A technical analysis of CVE-2026-105742 (GHSA-p3fw-7699-7926), a sensitive information disclosure vulnerability in the Docling document processing library. Vulnerable versions of Docling indiscriminately forward custom HTTP headers, such as authentication tokens, to arbitrary third-party origins and during cross-origin redirects while fetching remote image assets from untrusted HTML and EPUB documents.
CVE-2026-106121 is a Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability in the RabbitMQ Java Client library (amqp-client) affecting versions prior to 5.37.0. The vulnerability resides in the legacy, custom JSON-RPC parsing class com.rabbitmq.tools.json.JSONReader. When parsing malformed or truncated payloads ending within a quoted string or single-line comment, the parser's scanner enters an infinite loop. This occurs because the loop lacks an exit condition for the end-of-input sentinel character returned by the iterator, leading to either CPU exhaustion or a JVM crash from an OutOfMemoryError.