Skip to content

PDFME has XSS via Unsanitized i18n Label Injection into innerHTML in multiVariableText propPanel

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 20, 2026 in pdfme/pdfme • Updated Mar 20, 2026

Package

npm @pdfme/schemas (npm)

Affected versions

<= 5.5.9

Patched versions

5.5.10

Description

Summary

The multiVariableText property panel in @pdfme/schemas constructs HTML via string concatenation and assigns it to innerHTML using unsanitized i18n label values. An attacker who can control label overrides passed through options.labels can inject arbitrary JavaScript that executes in the context of any user who opens the Designer and selects a multiVariableText field with no {variables} in its text.

Details

When a user selects a multiVariableText schema field that contains no {variable} placeholders, the property panel renders instructional text by concatenating i18n-translated strings directly into innerHTML.

Vulnerable sinkpackages/schemas/src/multiVariableText/propPanel.ts:65-71:

// Use safe string concatenation for innerHTML
const typingInstructions = i18n('schemas.mvt.typingInstructions');
const sampleField = i18n('schemas.mvt.sampleField');
para.innerHTML =
  typingInstructions +
  ` <code style="color:${safeColorValue}; font-weight:bold;">{` +
  sampleField +
  '}</code>';

The comment on line 64 claims "safe string concatenation" but the result is assigned to innerHTML with no HTML escaping applied to typingInstructions or sampleField.

i18n lookup has no escapingpackages/ui/src/i18n.ts:903:

export const i18n = (key: keyof Dict, dict?: Dict) => (dict || getDict(DEFAULT_LANG))[key];

This is a plain dictionary lookup — no HTML encoding or sanitization.

Label override via deep mergepackages/ui/src/components/AppContextProvider.tsx:57-63:

let dict = getDict(lang);
if (options.labels) {
  dict = deepMerge(
    dict as unknown as Record<string, unknown>,
    options.labels as unknown as Record<string, unknown>,
  ) as typeof dict;
}

User-supplied options.labels values are deep-merged into the i18n dictionary with no content sanitization. The Zod schema validates labels as z.record(z.string(), z.string()) — enforcing type but not content safety.

Inconsistency: The color value on lines 58-62 is explicitly validated with a regex allowlist, demonstrating security awareness. The i18n string values were simply overlooked.

PoC

  1. Create a minimal app that passes attacker-controlled labels:
<html>
<body>
<div id="designer-container" style="width:100%;height:700px;"></div>
<script type="module">
import { Designer } from '@pdfme/ui';
import { multiVariableText } from '@pdfme/schemas';

const template = {
  basePdf: { width: 210, height: 297, padding: [10, 10, 10, 10] },
  schemas: [[{
    type: 'multiVariableText',
    name: 'field1',
    text: 'plain text with no variables',
    content: '{}',
    variables: [],
    position: { x: 20, y: 20 },
    width: 100,
    height: 20,
    readOnly: true,
  }]],
};

new Designer({
  domContainer: document.getElementById('designer-container'),
  template,
  plugins: { multiVariableText },
  options: {
    labels: {
      'schemas.mvt.typingInstructions':
        '<img src=x onerror="document.title=document.cookie">Inject: ',
      'schemas.mvt.sampleField': 'safe',
    },
  },
});
</script>
</body>
</html>
  1. Open the application in a browser.

  2. Click on the multiVariableText field (field1) in the Designer canvas to select it.

  3. Observe: The property panel renders the injected HTML. The onerror handler executes, setting document.title to the page's cookies. In a real attack, this would exfiltrate session tokens to an attacker-controlled server.

Impact

  • Session hijacking: Attacker-injected JavaScript can steal authentication cookies and tokens from any user who opens the Designer.
  • DOM manipulation: The injected script runs in the application's origin, allowing phishing overlays, form hijacking, or data exfiltration.
  • Stored XSS potential: In multi-tenant applications where labels are stored in a database or fetched from an API, a single poisoned label entry affects all users who subsequently open the Designer.
  • Scope change: The XSS payload executes in the embedding application's browser context, escaping the pdfme component's security boundary.

Recommended Fix

Replace innerHTML with safe DOM APIs in packages/schemas/src/multiVariableText/propPanel.ts:

// BEFORE (vulnerable):
para.innerHTML =
  typingInstructions +
  ` <code style="color:${safeColorValue}; font-weight:bold;">{` +
  sampleField +
  '}</code>';

// AFTER (safe):
para.appendChild(document.createTextNode(typingInstructions + ' '));
const codeEl = document.createElement('code');
codeEl.style.color = safeColorValue;
codeEl.style.fontWeight = 'bold';
codeEl.textContent = `{${sampleField}}`;
para.appendChild(codeEl);

This ensures that i18n label values are always treated as text content, never parsed as HTML, regardless of their source.

References

@hand-dot hand-dot published to pdfme/pdfme Mar 20, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 20, 2026
Reviewed Mar 20, 2026
Last updated Mar 20, 2026

Severity

Moderate

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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

EPSS score

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

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-xgx4-2wgv-4jhm

Source code

Credits

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