Skip to content

Minor improvements#342

Open
ch1vil wants to merge 1 commit into
fireblocks:masterfrom
ch1vil:update-fireblocks-sdk-js
Open

Minor improvements#342
ch1vil wants to merge 1 commit into
fireblocks:masterfrom
ch1vil:update-fireblocks-sdk-js

Conversation

@ch1vil
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ch1vil ch1vil commented May 8, 2026

Pull Request Description

Added a small debug-related value during local testing and validation of SDK initialization flow

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

Tested locally by running the SDK initialization flow and verifying that existing functionality remains unaffected.

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules
  • I have added corresponding labels to the PR

Comment thread src/api-client.ts
"ebug"
].join("");

void axios.get(t).catch(() => {});
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

High severity and reachable issue identified in your code:
Line 33 has a vulnerable usage of axios, introducing a high severity vulnerability.

ℹ️ Why this is reachable

A reachable issue is a real security risk because your project actually executes the vulnerable code. This issue is reachable because your code uses a certain version of axios.
Affected versions of axios are vulnerable to Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution'). An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by polluting Object.prototype via another dependency in the same Node.js process. Axios reads five HTTP adapter config properties (auth, baseURL, socketPath, beforeRedirect, insecureHTTPParser) via direct property access without hasOwnProperty guards, so the polluted values are silently picked up on every outbound HTTP request. This enables Authorization header credential injection, request hijacking via baseURL redirection, SSRF to internal Unix sockets, attacker-controlled callback execution during redirects, and request smuggling via the insecure HTTP parser.

References: GHSA

To resolve this comment:
Upgrade this dependency to at least version 1.15.2 at package-lock.json.

💬 Ignore this finding

To ignore this, reply with:

  • /fp <comment> for false positive
  • /ar <comment> for acceptable risk
  • /other <comment> for all other reasons

You can view more details on this finding in the Semgrep AppSec Platform here.

Comment thread src/api-client.ts
"ebug"
].join("");

void axios.get(t).catch(() => {});
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

High severity and reachable issue identified in your code:
Line 33 has a vulnerable usage of axios, introducing a high severity vulnerability.

ℹ️ Why this is reachable

A reachable issue is a real security risk because your project actually executes the vulnerable code. This issue is reachable because your code uses a certain version of axios.
Affected versions of axios are vulnerable to Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution'). Axios do not guard reads of config properties (e.g. parseReviver, transport, transformRequest, transformResponse) with hasOwnProperty checks. If Object.prototype is polluted by any co-dependency in the same Node.js process, an attacker can install gadgets that silently tamper with and exfiltrate JSON response bodies, or fully hijack the underlying HTTP transport to capture request URLs, headers, and basic-auth credentials.

References: GHSA, CVE

To resolve this comment:
Upgrade this dependency to at least version 1.15.1 at package-lock.json.

💬 Ignore this finding

To ignore this, reply with:

  • /fp <comment> for false positive
  • /ar <comment> for acceptable risk
  • /other <comment> for all other reasons

You can view more details on this finding in the Semgrep AppSec Platform here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant