undici is an HTTP client for Node.js. In versions 7.15.0 through 7.30.1 and 8.0.0 through 8.12.3, fetch verifies Subresource Integrity metadata by splitting the integrity string on a single space, but the SRI grammar separates metadata by ASCII whitespace, which also includes the horizontal tab. An integrity value whose digest is preceded by a tab or other ASCII whitespace is parsed as a single unrecognized token and skipped, and when no recognized algorithm remains undici treats the integrity list as empty and accepts the response, so a server returning a body different from the pinned digest passes the check. An application that pins a response with a valid but whitespace-surrounded SRI value receives attacker-controlled bytes with no integrity error, and the attacker needs only to control the response body, not the integrity metadata. The issue is fixed in undici 7.30.2 and 8.12.4, and users should upgrade to one of those versions or later. As a workaround, supply SRI integrity metadata without surrounding whitespace, using a single space to separate multiple digests.
CVE-2026-120423
This medium-severity CVE scores 5.9 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.1% (2nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.
Also known asEUVD-2026-118182 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD
- Lower severity and no public exploit yet
The CVE record names the fixed release — apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 5.9
- EG Score
- 5.9MEDIUMlow confidence
- EG Risk
- 27EG Risk 27/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity59% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.9 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation0% × 40%No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.Automatability0% × 15%CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: The CVE record names the fixed release. Apply it within your standard update timelines. - EPSS PROB
- 0.1%
- EPSS %ILE
- 2nd
- KEV
- Not listed
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.9 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.9 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
The CVE record names the fixed release. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
Published
November 6, 2026
Last Modified
November 6, 2026
Advisory Details (2)
Auto-updated Nov 6, 2026undici vulnerable to Subresource Integrity bypass via whitespace in integrity metadata · Advisory · nodejs/undici · GitHub
https://github.com/nodejs/undici/security/advisories/GHSA-r4pc-4jcp-7pqcSecurity Advisories | OpenJS Foundation CVE Numbering Authority
https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.htmlWeakness Classification(1)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 5× in last 7d / 5× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
- 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
- 2026-11-06 11:04 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-118182 · Source: ENISA EUVD
- 2026-11-06 10:27 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-11-06 10:14 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 5.9 MEDIUM
- 2026-11-06 10:12 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2026-120423?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-120423 published?
Is CVE-2026-120423 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-120423?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-120423?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-120423
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-120423?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.