Skip to content

Conversation

@depfu
Copy link

@depfu depfu bot commented Nov 10, 2025


Welcome to Depfu 👋

This is one of the first three pull requests with dependency updates we've sent your way. We tried to start with a few easy patch-level updates. Hopefully your tests will pass and you can merge this pull request without too much risk. This should give you an idea how Depfu works in general.

After you merge your first pull request, we'll send you a few more. We'll never open more than seven PRs at the same time so you're not getting overwhelmed with updates.

Let us know if you have any questions. Thanks so much for giving Depfu a try!



🚨 Your current dependencies have known security vulnerabilities 🚨

This dependency update fixes known security vulnerabilities. Please see the details below and assess their impact carefully. We recommend to merge and deploy this as soon as possible!


Here is everything you need to know about this upgrade. Please take a good look at what changed and the test results before merging this pull request.

What changed?

✳️ fastify (4.27.0 → 5.6.2) · Repo

Security Advisories 🚨

🚨 Fastify vulnerable to invalid content-type parsing, which could lead to validation bypass

Impact

In applications that specify different validation strategies for different content types, it's possible to bypass the validation by providing a slightly altered content type such as with different casing or altered whitespacing before ;.

Users using the the following pattern are affected:

fastify.post('/', {
  handler(request, reply) {
    reply.code(200).send(request.body)
  },
  schema: {
    body: {
      content: {
        'application/json': {
          schema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: {
              'foo': {
                type: 'string',
              }
            },
            required: ['foo']
          }
        },
      }
    }
  }
})

User using the following pattern are not affected:

fastify.post('/', {
  handler(request, reply) {
    reply.code(200).send(request.body)
  },
  schema: {
    body: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        'foo': {
          type: 'string',
        }
      },
      required: ['foo']
    }
  }
})

Patches

This was patched in v5.3.1, but unfortunately it did not cover all problems. This has been fully patched in v5.3.2.
Version v4.9.0 was also affected by this issue. This has been fully patched in v4.9.1.

Workarounds

Do not specify multiple content types in the schema.

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?

https://hackerone.com/reports/3087928

🚨 Fastify vulnerable to invalid content-type parsing, which could lead to validation bypass

Impact

In applications that specify different validation strategies for different content types, it's possible to bypass the validation by providing a slightly altered content type such as with different casing or altered whitespacing before ;.

Users using the the following pattern are affected:

fastify.post('/', {
  handler(request, reply) {
    reply.code(200).send(request.body)
  },
  schema: {
    body: {
      content: {
        'application/json': {
          schema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: {
              'foo': {
                type: 'string',
              }
            },
            required: ['foo']
          }
        },
      }
    }
  }
})

User using the following pattern are not affected:

fastify.post('/', {
  handler(request, reply) {
    reply.code(200).send(request.body)
  },
  schema: {
    body: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        'foo': {
          type: 'string',
        }
      },
      required: ['foo']
    }
  }
})

Patches

This was patched in v5.3.1, but unfortunately it did not cover all problems. This has been fully patched in v5.3.2.
Version v4.9.0 was also affected by this issue. This has been fully patched in v4.9.1.

Workarounds

Do not specify multiple content types in the schema.

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?

https://hackerone.com/reports/3087928

Release Notes

Too many releases to show here. View the full release notes.

Commits

See the full diff on Github. The new version differs by more commits than we can show here.


Depfu Status

Depfu will automatically keep this PR conflict-free, as long as you don't add any commits to this branch yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting with @depfu rebase.

All Depfu comment commands
@​depfu rebase
Rebases against your default branch and redoes this update
@​depfu recreate
Recreates this PR, overwriting any edits that you've made to it
@​depfu merge
Merges this PR once your tests are passing and conflicts are resolved
@​depfu cancel merge
Cancels automatic merging of this PR
@​depfu close
Closes this PR and deletes the branch
@​depfu reopen
Restores the branch and reopens this PR (if it's closed)
@​depfu pause
Ignores all future updates for this dependency and closes this PR
@​depfu pause [minor|major]
Ignores all future minor/major updates for this dependency and closes this PR
@​depfu resume
Future versions of this dependency will create PRs again (leaves this PR as is)

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

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant