Skip to content

Angular SSR: Missing Fallback Raw-Content Serialization Escaping leads to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jul 29, 2026 in angular/angular • Updated Aug 3, 2026

Package

npm @angular/platform-server (npm)

Affected versions

>= 22.0.0-next.0, < 22.0.7
>= 21.0.0-next.0, < 21.2.19
>= 20.0.0-next.0, < 20.3.27
<= 19.2.25

Patched versions

22.0.7
21.2.19
20.3.27

Description

A Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in @angular/platform-server's DOM emulation dependency (domino) when serializing the content of fallback raw-content elements (<iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>, and <noscript>).

When rendering dynamic text content inside fallback raw-content elements via template bindings, the template engine expects the browser to render the content safely. Under Server-Side Rendering (SSR), domino is configured with scripting enabled, meaning these elements are treated as raw-text elements.

However, domino's serializer previously did not escape text nodes within fallback raw-content elements (<iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>, <noscript>) during DOM serialization. As a result, any occurrence of closing tags in the bound dynamic text was not escaped.

The unescaped closing tag could be serialized directly into the output HTML. When parsed by a browser or re-parsed during SSR post-processing without preserving raw-content parser state, an injected closing tag closes the element early, allowing an injected script block to execute in the user's browser context, causing same-origin Cross-Site Scripting (XSS).

Impact

This vulnerability allows an attacker to perform same-origin Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks against any user visiting an SSR-rendered page that binds user-controlled data inside fallback raw-content elements (<iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>, <noscript>). This can lead to session hijacking, credentials theft, unauthorized actions on behalf of users, and defacement.

Patched Versions

  • 22.0.7
  • 21.2.19
  • 20.3.27

Workarounds

If you cannot immediately update your dependencies, you can mitigate this issue using any of the following approaches:

  • Disable critical CSS inlining: Critical CSS inlining in Angular SSR post-processes the rendered HTML using domino. Disabling this step prevents domino from re-parsing and re-serializing the HTML during server-side rendering.
    • In angular.json, set inlineCritical to false under style optimization options: 
      {
  "projects": {
    "my-app": {
      "architect": {
        "build": {
          "builder": "@angular/build:application",
          "options": {
            "optimization": {
              "styles": {
                "inlineCritical": false
              }
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}
    • When rendering programmatically with CommonEngine, set inlineCriticalCss: false in your render options.
  • Avoid binding user-controlled values inside fallback raw-content elements (<iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>, <noscript>).
  • Sanitize user input placed inside these elements to explicitly strip or escape closing tags before passing it to the template.

References

@alan-agius4 alan-agius4 published to angular/angular Jul 29, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Aug 3, 2026
Reviewed Aug 3, 2026
Last updated Aug 3, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction Passive
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(27th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-69149

GHSA ID

GHSA-vpx6-8pjr-4g3v

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.