Incorrect default cookie name and recommendation

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS

not scored

EPSS

No dated EPSS signal available.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

Impact What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? The default cookie name (and documentation recommendation) was prefixed with Host instead of Host-. The point of this prefix is for additional security, to ensure that, when no domain option is provided in the cookie options, we can guarantee the cookie came from the correct domain. Patches Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to? Yes, the problem is patched from version 2.2.1, this will not be back ported, but you can use the workaround described below. Workarounds Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading? You can work around this by providing a custom cookieName as part of the options, which is correctly prefixed with Host-. References Are there any links users can visit to find out more? https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Cross-SiteRequestForgeryPreventionCheatSheet.html#cookie-with-host-prefix For more information If you have any questions or…

Published by the source

10 Oct 2022, 20:59 UTC

Last modified by the source

9 Jan 2023, 05:00 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 12:06 UTC

1. Revision 2 · amended · 26 Oct 2026

   Amended from ghsa record GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976

2. Revision 1 · created · 24 Oct 2026

   Published from osv record GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976

Advisory: Incorrect default cookie name and recommendation
IDs: GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/ghsa-jjmg-x456-w976 (revision 2, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 12:06 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: Unrated
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: csrf-csrf 2.2.1. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- npm csrf-csrf: affected < 2.2.1; fixed in 2.2.1

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- `npm ls csrf-csrf --all`: lists every installed copy and version, including transitive ones. Run in the project root after `npm ci`.

## Supported action
Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on csrf-csrf.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976 (OSV record GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976 lists affected ranges: npm csrf-csrf >=0 <2.2.1 (fixed))
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-jjmg-x456-w976 lists affected ranges: npm csrf-csrf >=0 <2.2.1)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.