CVE-2026-12143

form-data builds multipart/form-data request bodies. Through v4.0.5, the field name passed to FormData#append and the filename option are concatenated directly into the Content-Disposition header with no escaping of CR (\r), LF (\n), or ". An application that uses untrusted input as a field name or filename therefore lets an attacker terminate the header line and either inject additional headers or smuggle whole additional multipart parts into the request the application forwards to a backend.

This is CWE-93 (CRLF injection). It is a divergence from how browsers and the WHATWG HTML spec serialize form-data (they escape these characters), so the fix is to match that behavior. Severity is conditional: it depends on the consuming application passing attacker-controlled data as a field name or filename. Applications that only use fixed/trusted field names are not affected.

Details

In lib/form_data.js, _multiPartHeader builds the part header as:

'Content-Disposition': ['form-data', 'name="' + field + '"'].concat(contentDisposition || [])

and _getContentDisposition builds filename="' + filename + '"'. Neither escapes control characters, so a \r\n in field/filename ends the header line. The same applies to ", which can break out of the quoted parameter.

Proof of concept

const FormData = require('form-data');
const form = new FormData();
form.append('email"\r\nX-Injected: true\r\nfake="', '[email protected]');
console.log(form.getBuffer().toString());

Before the fix this emits an injected X-Injected: true header line. A field name that also includes --<boundary> sequences can introduce additional parts (e.g. an extra name="is_admin" field), which a downstream parser accepts as legitimate.

Severity

The demonstrated, library-attributable impact is integrity (field/header injection); there is no demonstrated confidentiality disclosure or availability impact in form-data itself, and exploitation requires the consuming app to feed untrusted data into field names/filenames. A Moderate (≈5.3, I:L) rating is also defensible given that precondition.

Workaround

Until upgrading, validate or reject field names/filenames that contain control characters before calling append:

if (/[\r\n]/.test(field)) { throw new Error('invalid field name'); }

Credit

Reported by yueyueL.

For an application that uses untrusted field names/filenames:

• Field injection / override (integrity). Inject or override fields the backend trusts (e.g. is_admin, role), the primary demonstrated impact.
• Header injection into the generated multipart part.

Claims of guaranteed privilege escalation, authentication bypass, high confidentiality impact, and availability impact are application-dependent downstream consequences, not properties of form-data itself, and are not demonstrated by the PoC.

CVE-2026-12143 has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (2.5.6, 3.0.5, 4.0.6); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Kodem intelligence

Fixed in 4.0.6, 3.0.5, and 2.5.6. Users on older 0.x/1.x/2.x releases should upgrade to 2.5.6 or later.

The fix escapes \r, \n, and " as %0D, %0A, and %22 in field names and filenames, matching the WHATWG HTML multipart/form-data encoding algorithm that browsers implement. This neutralizes the injection while leaving ordinary field names (including name[0], dotted, and unicode names) unchanged.

1. What is CVE-2026-12143? CVE-2026-12143 is a high-severity security vulnerability in form-data (npm), affecting versions < 2.5.6. It is fixed in 2.5.6, 3.0.5, 4.0.6.
2. How severe is CVE-2026-12143? CVE-2026-12143 has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
3. Which versions of form-data are affected by CVE-2026-12143? form-data (npm) versions < 2.5.6 is affected.
4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-12143? Yes. CVE-2026-12143 is fixed in 2.5.6, 3.0.5, 4.0.6. Upgrade to this version or later.
5. Is CVE-2026-12143 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-12143 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
6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-12143 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.
7. How do I fix CVE-2026-12143?
   • Upgrade form-data to 2.5.6 or later
   • Upgrade form-data to 3.0.5 or later
   • Upgrade form-data to 4.0.6 or later