CVE-2023-26158: All versions of the package mockjs are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the Util.extend function due to missing check if the attribute…
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 32/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.80% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 56.9% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
All versions of the package mockjs are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the Util.extend function due to missing check if the attribute resolves to the object prototype. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This can be problematic if the software depends on existence or non-existence of certain attributes, or uses pre-defined attributes of object prototype (such as hasOwnProperty, toString or valueOf). User controlled inputs inside the extend() method of the Mock.Handler, Mock.Random, Mock.RE.Handler or Mock.Util, will allow an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. Workaround By using a denylist of dangerous attributes, this weakness can be eliminated. Add the following line in the Util.extend function: js js if (["__proto__", "constructor", "prototype"].includes(name)) continue js // src/mock/handler.js Util.extend = function extend() { var target = arguments[0] || {}, i = 1, length = arguments.length, options, name, src, copy, clone if (length === 1) { target = this i = 0 } for (; i < length; i++) { options = arguments[i] if (!options) continue for (name in options) { if (["__proto__", "constructor", "prototype"].includes(name)) continue src = target[name] copy = options[name] if (target === copy) continue if (copy === undefined) continue if (Util.isArray(copy) || Util.isObject(copy)) { if (Util.isArray(copy)) clone = src && Util.isArray(src) ? src : [] if (Util.isObject(copy)) clone = src && Util.isObject(src) ? src : {} target[name] = Util.extend(clone, copy) } else { target[name] = copy } } } return target }
- Published
- Dec 8, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.8% · 56th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-1321
Report tools
Action score
32
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 32 / 40 · 8.2 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.8%
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 8.2
- CNA · snyk
- 8.2
- agree
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H/E:P
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| mockjs | mock.js | cpe:2.3:a:mockjs:mock.js |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- mockjs mock.jsup to 1.1.0 inclusive
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (snyk). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
n/a mockjs
- all versionsaffected · semver
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | mockjs | up to and including 1.1.0 | — |
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-1321 · Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.