SvelteKit vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery
CVE-2023-29003 · GHSA-5p75-vc5g-8rv2 · published 4 Apr 2023
How serious is it
- Severity: high, CVSS score 8.8 out of 10.
- No exploit prediction (EPSS) score yet.
- Not on the CISA list of exploited vulnerabilities.
- No public exploit in Exploit-DB.
Is your app affected by CVE-2023-29003?
Paste this prompt into Claude Code, Cursor or any AI coding tool: it runs a free Shippable scan of your project and fixes what it finds. Built with Lovable, Bolt or v0? Scan your live app. Or upload your package file.
Who is affected
@sveltejs/kit(npm) < 1.15.1
How to check
- Run
npm ls @sveltejs/kitin your project to see the installed version, including copies pulled in by other packages. - Or paste your lockfile into the checker: it lists every package with a known vulnerability, this one included.
- Or run
npx shippable-dev scan localhost:3000in your project folder. It reads your lockfile and flags this vulnerability along with every other known one.
How to fix
Copies a prompt for Claude Code, Cursor or Codex: it checks your lockfiles for this and upgrades it.
- Upgrade
@sveltejs/kitto 1.15.1 or later, commit the lockfile and redeploy. - If a vulnerable version was live, check your logs and rotate the secrets that server could read.
The advisory
### Summary
The SvelteKit framework offers developers an option to create simple REST APIs. This is done by defining a `+server.js` file, containing endpoint handlers for different HTTP methods.
SvelteKit provides out-of-the-box cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection to it’s users. The protection is implemented at `kit/src/runtime/server/respond.js#L52`. While the implementation does a sufficient job in mitigating common CSRF attacks, the protection can be bypassed by simply specifying a different `Content-Type` header value.
### Details
The CSRF protection is implemented using the code shown below.
```js
const forbidden =
// (1)
request.method === 'POST' &&
// (2)
request.headers.get('origin') !== url.origin &&
// (3)
is_form_content_type(request);
if (forbidden) {
// (4)
const csrf_error = error(403, `Cross-site ${request.method} form submissions are forbidden`);
if (request.headers.get('accept') === 'application/json') {
return json(csrf_error.body, { status: csrf_error.status });
}
return text(csrf_error.body.message, { status: csrf_error.status });
}
```
If the incoming request specifies a POST method (1), the protection will compare the server’s origin with the value of the HTTP `Origin` header (2). A mismatch between these values signals that a potential attack has been detected. The final check is performed on the request’s `Content-Type` header (3) whether the value is either `application/x-www-form-urlencoded` or `multipart/form-data` (`kit/src/utils/http.js#L71`). If all the previous checks pass, the request will be rejected with an 403 error response (4).
The `is_form_content_type` validation is not sufficient to mitigate all possible variations of this type of attack. If a CSRF attack is performed with the `Content-Type` header set to `text/plain`, the protection will be circumvented and the request will be processed by the endpoint handler.
<!--
### PoC
To reproduce this issue, create and run a simple server (by default running on `localhost:3000`) with a POST endpoint handler such as:
```js
export async function POST({ request }) {
const data = await request.json();
console.log(JSON.stringify(data));
return new Response(String('success'));
}
```
Next, save the malicious HTML page:
```html
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head></head>
<body>
<h1 id="name"></h1>
<form action="http://localhost:3000/api/test" method="POST" enctype="text/plain">
<input type="hidden" name="{"name":"test" value="","age":123}" />
<input type="submit" value="Submit" />
</form>
</body>
</html>
```
in a file named `index.html`. Run another web server, using Python’s built in http.server module (`python -m http.server`, by default running on `localhost:8000`), navigate to [http://localhost:8000/index.html](http://localhost:8000/index.html) and click the `Submit` button.
Verify that the browser’s URL has changed to `localhost:3000` and that the text `success` is displayed on the screen. Additionally, inspect the console of the SvelteKit web server and verify that the request body (`{"name":"test=","age":123}`) was parsed as valid JSON and printed out.
It's worth noting that this attack is possible only for JSON request bodies. Form data sent using `text/plain` will be rejected by the server.
-->
### Impact
If abused, this issue will allow malicious requests to be submitted from third-party domains, which can allow execution of operations within the context of the victim's session, and in extreme scenarios can lead to unauthorized access to users’ accounts.
### Remediation
SvelteKit 1.15.1 updates the `is_form_content_type` function call in the CSRF protection logic to include `text/plain`.
As additional hardening of the CSRF protection mechanism against potential method overrides, SvelteKit 1.15.1 is now performing validation on PUT, PATCH and DELETE methods as well. This latter hardening is only needed to protect users who have put in some sort of `?_method=` override feature themselves in their `handle` hook, so that the request that `resolve` sees could be `PUT`/`PATCH`/`DELETE` when the browser issues a `POST` request.
Check your whole app
Dependencies are only half of it. Free and read-only: before you push, run npx shippable-dev scan localhost:3000 in your project folder, no account needed. For your live app, you prove it's yours with a one-line tag first.
References
- github.com/sveltejs/kit/security/advisories/GHSA-5p75-vc5g-8rv2
- github.com/sveltejs/kit/commit/bb2253d51d00aba2e4353952d4fb0dcde6c77123
- nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-29003
- github.com/sveltejs/kit/releases/tag/%40sveltejs%2Fkit%401.15.1
- github.com/advisories/GHSA-5p75-vc5g-8rv2
Merged from GitHub Advisory Database. Last updated 23 Oct 2026. All vulnerabilities · RSS · JSON