Skip to content

fix: exclude GHSA-rpmf-866q-6p89 (basic-ftp DoS) from yarn audit to unblock publish#8704

Closed
Doddanna17 wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
SI-512-exclude-basic-ftp-ghsa-rpmf-866q-6p89
Closed

fix: exclude GHSA-rpmf-866q-6p89 (basic-ftp DoS) from yarn audit to unblock publish#8704
Doddanna17 wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
SI-512-exclude-basic-ftp-ghsa-rpmf-866q-6p89

Conversation

@Doddanna17
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ticket: SI-512

Summary

  • Adds GHSA-rpmf-866q-6p89 to .iyarc to exclude it from the yarn audit check
  • This unblocks the chore(root): publish modules CI job which was failing with 5 HIGH severity findings — all the same advisory (GHSA-rpmf-866q-6p89) reported across 5 different dependency paths through basic-ftp

Why the exclusion is safe

The vulnerability is a client-side DoS in basic-ftp via unbounded multiline FTP control response buffering. The affected package reaches us through:

@bitgo/sdk-api > proxy-agent > pac-proxy-agent > get-uri > basic-ftp
  • basic-ftp is used only for PAC-based proxy URL resolution, not for direct FTP operations
  • Exploitation requires connecting to a malicious FTP server — all proxy targets are controlled internal endpoints
  • A sibling advisory on the same package (GHSA-rp42-5vxx-qpwr, DoS via Client.list()) is already excluded under the same rationale
  • No compatible patched version is available in the current get-uri dependency chain

Impact

Unblocks the publish of @bitgo/sdk-coin-hbar containing the explainTransaction fix for HBAR staking (PR #8700, merged), which is needed to unblock end-to-end HBAR stake signing on staging.

Related

DoS via unbounded multiline FTP control response buffering in basic-ftp.
Same transitive chain as the already-excluded GHSA-rp42-5vxx-qpwr:
pac-proxy-agent > get-uri > basic-ftp, used only for PAC proxy resolution.
All 5 yarn audit findings are the same advisory across different dep paths.

Ticket: SI-512
@linear-code
Copy link
Copy Markdown

linear-code Bot commented May 6, 2026

@Doddanna17 Doddanna17 marked this pull request as ready for review May 6, 2026 23:06
@Doddanna17 Doddanna17 requested review from a team as code owners May 6, 2026 23:06
@Doddanna17 Doddanna17 closed this May 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant