Summary
Excelize: Streaming GetRows row-bound bypass causes attacker-controlled allocation
Streaming GetRows row-bound bypass causes attacker-controlled allocation
Excelize's prior row-bound fix for GHSA-h69g / CVE-2026-54063 protects the checked worksheet parser, but the streaming worksheet reader used by Rows and GetRows does not enforce the same TotalRows bound on the row r attribute. A small XLSX file can set a row number above Excelize's maximum row (1048576) and omit the cell coordinate. GetRows then appends empty rows up to the attacker-controlled row index and returns success.
This was reproduced on the current default branch commit 1213a8bd7c5ab360554603ac5c995ccaf6eb4314 and the latest release tag v2.10.1 (5ad5ab3af0054c55bdce09f1530085600e9f2e45).
Affected package
- Package:
github.com/xuri/excelize/v2 - Tested affected versions: current default branch at
1213a8bd7c5ab360554603ac5c995ccaf6eb4314, and releasev2.10.1 - Fixed version: none known at the time of this report
Root cause
The checked parser path validates row numbers:
excelize.go:checkRowNum(r int)rejects negative rows and rows greater thanTotalRows.excelize.go:checkSheet()callscheckRowNum(r.R)before allocating sheet rows.workSheetReader()invokescheckSheet()/checkRow()before returning a cached worksheet.
The streaming path does not use that checked parser:
rows.go:Rows(sheet)opens an XML decoder directly.Rows.Next()accepts the rowrattribute and assigns it to the iterator's current row without applyingcheckRowNum().Rows.Columns()also assigns rowrto the iterator state without applyingcheckRowNum().GetRows()appends empty row slices for the gap between the previous row and the current row.
Because a cell without an r coordinate can still contain a value, the worksheet can avoid cell-coordinate row validation while still causing GetRows() to materialize rows up to the out-of-range row number.
Minimal worksheet payload
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<worksheet xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/spreadsheetml/2006/main">
<sheetData>
<row r="2000000"><c t="s"><v>0</v></c></row>
</sheetData>
</worksheet>
The workbook also contains a normal sharedStrings.xml with one string (ok).
Reproduction
A minimal Go harness creates the XLSX in memory and calls GetRows("Sheet1"):
rows, err := f.GetRows("Sheet1")
fmt.Println("rows_len:", len(rows))
if len(rows) > 0 {
fmt.Println("last_row:", rows[len(rows)-1])
}
fmt.Printf("returned error: %T %v\n", err, err)
Observed output on current default branch commit 1213a8bd7c5ab360554603ac5c995ccaf6eb4314:
== streaming GetRows row r=2000000 cell without r ==
rows_len: 2000000
last_row: [ok]
returned error: <nil> <nil>
elapsed=21ms alloc_delta=46MB
Observed output on latest release tag v2.10.1:
== streaming GetRows row r=2000000 cell without r ==
rows_len: 2000000
last_row: [ok]
returned error: <nil> <nil>
elapsed=14ms alloc_delta=46MB
A control using the checked parser with row r="1048577" and c r="A1048577" correctly returns row number exceeds maximum limit, confirming this report is about inconsistent enforcement in the streaming path rather than a missing global constant.
Expected behavior
Rows / GetRows should reject row numbers greater than TotalRows with the same error behavior as the checked parser path.
Suggested remediation
- Apply the same row-bound validation in the streaming reader immediately after parsing a row
rattribute. - Preserve and return row parsing errors from
GetRows()instead of silently continuing or returning onlyRows.Close()errors. - Add regression tests for
GetRows()on a worksheet containingrow r="1048577"with a cell value but no cellrcoordinate.
Impact
An attacker who can provide an XLSX file to an application that calls GetRows can cause memory and CPU usage to scale with an attacker-controlled row number, even though the file itself is tiny. This is an availability issue and appears to be an incomplete coverage variant of the GHSA-h69g row-index allocation class.
In the conservative PoC, row r="2000000" returned a [][]string with length 2,000,000 and allocated about 46 MB. Larger row numbers scale the allocation further.
Crafted input forces the application to consume excessive CPU, memory, or other resources, degrading or denying service. Typical impact: denial of service.
Affected versions
Security releases
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
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-59161? CVE-2026-59161 is a high-severity uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability in github.com/xuri/excelize/v2 (go), affecting versions < 2.11.0. It is fixed in 2.11.0. Crafted input forces the application to consume excessive CPU, memory, or other resources, degrading or denying service.
- Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-59161?
github.com/xuri/excelize/v2(go) (versions < 2.11.0)github.com/xuri/excelize(go) (versions <= 1.4.0)
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-59161? Yes. CVE-2026-59161 is fixed in 2.11.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-59161 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-59161 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
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-59161 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.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-59161? Upgrade
github.com/xuri/excelize/v2to 2.11.0 or later.