HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 44644 liquidjss striphtml filter bypass via newline
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 6.1CVE-2026-44644GHSA-2QV6-9WX5-CWV4

LiquidJS's strip_html filter bypass via newline characters in HTML tags enables XSSCVE-2026-44644

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-44644 records a Medium severity (CVSS 6.1) vulnerability in LiquidJS's strip_html filter bypass via newline characters in HTML tags enables XSS. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps liquidjs (npm), liquidjs (npm), liquidjs (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published May 27, 2026Updated Oct 27, 2026Source checked Oct 27, 2026First seen by HOL Jun 22, 2026Material review Oct 27, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Record context

Vulnerability class
XSS
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-79
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Oct 27, 2026
References
7 linked sources
Open source record

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 6.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
3 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 6.1. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps liquidjs (npm), liquidjs (npm), liquidjs (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
liquidjsnpm<=10.25.7Not reported
liquidjsnpm<10.26.010.26.0
liquidjsnpm>=0 <10.26.010.26.0

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for liquidjs, liquidjs, liquidjs.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update liquidjs to 10.26.0; liquidjs to 10.26.0 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    May 27, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 27, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Jun 22, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
Upstream source description

## Summary The `strip_html` filter in liquidjs is intended to remove HTML tags from a string before rendering, and is widely used as an XSS sanitizer. The implementation uses a regex whose catch-all branch (`<.*?>`) does not match line terminators, so any HTML tag containing a `\n` or `\r` character passes through unmodified. An attacker who can place a newline inside a tag (e.g. `<img\nsrc=x\nonerror=alert(1)>`) bypasses sanitization entirely, since browsers treat newlines as whitespace within a tag and execute the resulting `onerror`/`onload`/etc. handler. This results in stored or reflected XSS in any application that relies on `strip_html` to neutralize untrusted HTML. ## Details The vulnerable code is in `src/filters/html.ts`: ```ts // src/filters/html.ts:45-49 export function strip_html (this: FilterImpl, v: string) { const str = stringify(v) this.context.memoryLimit.use(str.length) return str.replace(/<script[\s\S]*?<\/script>|<style[\s\S]*?<\/style>|<.*?>|<!--[\s\S]*?-->/g, '') } ``` The regex has four alternations: 1. `<script[\s\S]*?<\/script>` — uses `[\s\S]`, matches across newlines. 2. `<style[\s\S]*?<\/style>` — uses `[\s\S]`, matches across newlines. 3. `<.*?>` — uses `.`, which in JavaScript does **not** match `\n` or `\r` (no `s`/dotAll flag set). 4. `<!--[\s\S]*?-->` — uses `[\s\S]`, matches across newlines. Branch 3 is the catch-all for "any other tag." Because `.` excludes line terminators, a tag containing a newline does not match any alternative. The literal characters of the tag are passed through to the output. Browsers, however, parse HTML tag content with whitespace tolerance: per the HTML spec, attribute names and values may be separated by ASCII whitespace, which includes `\n` and `\r`. So `<img\nsrc=x\nonerror=alert(1)>` is parsed as a valid `img` element with an `onerror` handler. `liquidjs`' default rendering pipeline does not auto-escape filter output (the `outputEscape` engine option is undefined by default — see `src/liquid-options.ts`), so the unescaped HTML is delivered verbatim to the consumer's HTML response. Trust path: - Application receives untrusted input (e.g. user comment field). - Developer renders it as `{{ comment | strip_html }}` to "safely" embed user content as plaintext. - Attacker submits `<img\u000Asrc=x\u000Aonerror=alert(document.cookie)>`. - `strip_html` returns the input unchanged. - Output is written into the HTML response with no further escaping. - Victim's browser executes the attacker's JavaScript in the application's origin. This is an inconsistency bug: the same regex correctly uses `[\s\S]` for `<script>`, `<style>`, and comment branches, but reverts to `.` for the catch-all. The other branches' authors clearly knew to handle multi-line content; the catch-all was missed. ## PoC Reproduces against current HEAD (10.25.7) using the published `dist/liquid.node.js` build: ```bash node -e " const { Liquid } = require('./dist/liquid.node.js'); const engine = new Liquid(); engine.parseAndRender( 'Safe output: {{ input | strip_html }}', { input: '<img\nsrc=x\nonerror=\"alert(document.cookie)\">' } ).then(r => console.log(JSON.stringify(r))); " ``` Verified output: ``` "Safe output: <img\nsrc=x\nonerror=\"alert(document.cookie)\">" ``` The `<img ... onerror=...>` tag is delivered to the output completely unmodified. When this string is placed into an HTML document and parsed by a browser, the `onerror` handler executes. Same bypass works with `\r` (carriage return), `\r\n`, or any combination of CR/LF inside the tag. It also works with other event-handler vectors (`<svg\nonload=alert(1)>`, `<body\nonload=alert(1)>`, `<iframe\nsrc="javascript:alert(1)">`, etc.) and is not specific to `<img>`. For comparison, the same input without a newline is correctly stripped: ```bash node -e " const { Liquid } = require('./dist/liquid.node.js'); const engine = new Liquid(); engine.parseAndRender( 'Safe output: {{ input | strip_html }}', { input: '<img src=x onerror=\"alert(1)\">' } ).then(r => console.log(JSON.stringify(r))); " # → "Safe output: " ``` This confirms `strip_html` is intended to remove tags of this shape, and the newline form is a sanitizer bypass rather than expected behavior. ## Impact Any liquidjs-using application that: 1. Renders attacker-controlled strings via `{{ x | strip_html }}` to defend against HTML injection, AND 2. Does not separately HTML-escape that output (default behavior — `outputEscape` is unset by default), Is vulnerable to stored or reflected XSS. The attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the victim's browser in the application's origin, enabling session theft, account takeover, CSRF with origin-scoped credentials, and arbitrary actions in the victim's authenticated session. The XSS is triggered with simple, well-known event-handler payloads — no exotic encoding, no character set tricks, just a literal newline inside the tag. The blast radius matches the deployment of liquidjs as a server-side template engine: liquidjs is one of the most popular Liquid implementations on npm (millions of downloads/week) and `strip_html` is documented as the sanitization filter for HTML stripping, so the vulnerable pattern (`{{ user | strip_html }}`) is the natural and recommended use of the filter. ## Recommended Fix Replace `<.*?>` with `<[\s\S]*?>` (or apply the `s`/dotAll flag to the entire regex) so the catch-all branch matches across line terminators, consistent with the other branches: ```ts // src/filters/html.ts export function strip_html (this: FilterImpl, v: string) { const str = stringify(v) this.context.memoryLimit.use(str.length) return str.replace(/<script[\s\S]*?<\/script>|<style[\s\S]*?<\/style>|<[\s\S]*?>|<!--[\s\S]*?-->/g, '') } ``` Equivalent fix using the dotAll flag (requires ES2018+, which liquidjs already targets): ```ts return str.replace(/<script.*?<\/script>|<style.*?<\/style>|<.*?>|<!--.*?-->/gs, '') ``` After the fix, the PoC input is correctly reduced to an empty string. Note that `strip_html` should still not be relied on as a primary XSS defense — the project README/documentation should recommend HTML-escaping (`escape` filter) for untrusted content rendered into HTML contexts. A brief security note in the filter's documentation would help users who currently treat `strip_html` as a sanitizer.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Stored XSS in KGS Software tia ViewerAlso CWE-79