HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

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.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 56698 nuxt url handling weaknesses in navigateto and
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
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 6.1CVE-2026-56698GHSA-C9CV-MQ2M-PPP3

Nuxt: URL-handling weaknesses in `navigateTo` and `reloadNuxtApp`: SSR open redirect, client-side script execution via the `open` option, and protocol-relative bypass in `reloadNuxtApp`CVE-2026-56698

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-56698 records a Medium severity (CVSS 6.1) vulnerability in Nuxt: URL-handling weaknesses in `navigateTo` and `reloadNuxtApp`: SSR open redirect, client-side script execution via the `open` option, and protocol-relative bypass in `reloadNuxtApp`. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

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

Published Jun 2, 2026Updated Oct 3, 2026Source checked Oct 10, 2026First seen by HOL Jun 19, 2026Material review Oct 3, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 6.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
5 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 nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm), nuxt (npm) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
nuxtnpm>=4.0.0 <4.4.74.4.7
nuxtnpm>=3.5.0 <3.21.73.21.7
nuxtnpm>=4.0.0,<4.4.74.4.7
nuxtnpm<3.21.73.21.7
nuxtnpm>=3.5.0,<3.21.73.21.7

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for nuxt, nuxt, nuxt.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update nuxt to 4.4.7; nuxt to 3.21.7; nuxt to 4.4.7; nuxt to 3.21.7; nuxt to 3.21.7 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Jun 2, 2026

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

    Oct 3, 2026

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

    Jun 19, 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
  • 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
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • Source referencevulncheck.com
  • Source referencevulncheck.com
  • Source referencevulncheck.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
Upstream source description

### Summary Three weaknesses in Nuxt's client-navigation URL handling, all reachable from documented public APIs (`navigateTo` and `reloadNuxtApp`): 1. **(CVE-2026-56326) SSR open redirect in `navigateTo` via path-normalisation bypass.** `navigateTo` decided whether a target was external by inspecting the raw input with `hasProtocol(..., { acceptRelative: true })`. Inputs such as `/..//evil.com`, `/.//evil.com`, `/%2e%2e//evil.com`, or `/app/..//evil.com` slipped past that check because they start with `/`, but WHATWG URL parsing then normalised them to the protocol-relative pathname `//evil.com`. The normalised value was written to the `Location` response header and into the `<meta http-equiv="refresh">` body of the SSR redirect page, so a victim's browser would resolve the redirect cross-origin to the attacker's host. 2. **(CVE-2026-56698) Client-side script execution via `navigateTo({ open: ... })`.** The client-side early-open handler called `window.open(toPath, ...)` without applying the `isScriptProtocol` check that gates the normal `navigateTo` path. A target of `javascript:...` (or another script-capable scheme) passed to `navigateTo(url, { open: { ... } })` therefore executed in the application's origin instead of being rejected. 3. **(CVE-2026-56697) Open redirect in `reloadNuxtApp` via protocol-relative bypass.** `reloadNuxtApp({ path })` rejects script-capable protocols by parsing the path with `new URL(path, window.location.href)` and checking the resolved `protocol` against `isScriptProtocol`. Protocol-relative paths such as `//evil.com` resolve to the current page's protocol (`https:`), which passes that check; the value is then assigned to `window.location.href`, which the browser treats as a cross-origin redirect. This is the same protocol-relative bypass family as (1), in a different sink. ### Impact For (1), the practical risk is phishing or OAuth-code theft against any Nuxt app that forwards user-controlled input (for example a `?next=` query parameter on a login route) into `navigateTo` on the server. The framework documents that `navigateTo` blocks external hosts unless `external: true` is passed, so maintainers commonly rely on it as the safe path for post-login redirects. For (2), any app that passes a user-controlled URL into `navigateTo(url, { open: { ... } })` was vulnerable to reflected XSS in the application's first-party origin. For (3), any app that forwards user-controlled input into `reloadNuxtApp({ path })` could be redirected cross-origin for phishing or OAuth-code theft, even on releases that already shipped the `isScriptProtocol` guard added by [#35115](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/pull/35115). ### Patches Fixed in `[email protected]` and backported to `[email protected]`. The three sinks are addressed by: - Path-normalisation bypass in `navigateTo`: - 4.x: commit [`2cce6fb0`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/2cce6fb02e621196d56df92e05594e07469b5a6d) - 3.x: commit [`1f2dd5e7`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/1f2dd5e78c77576437138e97671965573c232835) - `navigateTo({ open })` script-protocol guard: - 4.x: [#35206](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/pull/35206) (commit [`3394716d`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/3394716d4a913cba904b028df5338f2aead50032)) - 3.x: commit [`62fc32ed`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/62fc32eddf648b00a3890141e0235d2a222b024d) - Protocol-relative bypass in `reloadNuxtApp`: - 4.x: commit [`e447a793`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/e447a793c47766834f7497f8412a76cd56fd8ee1) - 3.x: commit [`6497d99d`](https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/commit/6497d99dd106254abd089f6a263d7773869a343b) ### Workarounds - For (1): validate redirect targets before passing them to `navigateTo`, for example reject any input where `new URL(target, 'http://localhost').pathname` starts with `//`, or only accept a known allow-list of paths. - For (2): reject any user-controlled URL whose protocol is not in an allow-list (typically just `http:` and `https:`) before passing it to `navigateTo({ open: ... })`. - For (3): same shape as (1). Reject paths starting with `//` (or where `new URL(path, window.location.href).host !== window.location.host`) before passing to `reloadNuxtApp({ path })`. ### References - CWE-601: URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') - CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') ### Credits Reported by Anthropic / Claude as `ANT-2026-S08HN6DH` through Anthropic's coordinated vulnerability disclosure programme. The `reloadNuxtApp` protocol-relative bypass (sink 3) was independently reported by [@alcls01111](https://github.com/alcls01111) via GitHub's coordinated disclosure flow (`GHSA-w7fp-2cfv-4837`), closed as a duplicate of this advisory.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Contao: Cross-site scripting in the comments bundleAlso CWE-79
  • @tinacms/web-components: `tina-markdown` writes rich-text link URLs into `href` without scheme validation, allowing stored XSSAlso CWE-79
  • TinaCMS admin preview iframe loads an attacker-controlled origin from the URL fragmentAlso CWE-601
  • Advanced Classifieds & Directory Pro <= 3.4.4 - Authenticated (Custom+) Stored Cross-Site Scripting via 'phone' ParameterAlso CWE-79
  • Tina: Code injection via unescaped Git branch name in generated client sourceSame npm ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
XSS
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-601, CWE-79
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Oct 10, 2026
References
17 linked sources
Open source record