GHSA-rpw4-54j3-4h4q: SSRF
Summary
Address6.isLinkLocal() recognizes fe80::/64 rather than fe80::/10. Link-local unicast is the whole /10 under RFC 4291 §2.4 and the IANA IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry, so the method returns false for every link-local address outside the one /64 that stateless address autoconfiguration happens to use. new Address6('fe81::1').isLinkLocal() is false.
The library contradicts itself on the same object: for fe81::1, getType() returns 'Link-local unicast', getScope() returns 'Link local', and isHostInSubnet(new Address6('fe80::/10')) returns true, while isLinkLocal() returns false.
An application that builds a network trust-boundary decision on these checks (for example a filter intended to block Server-Side Request Forgery, or SSRF) will classify a link-local target as unremarkable and allow the request. SSRF is an attack in which a user-supplied address coaxes the server into making a request to an internal destination the user could not otherwise reach.
Details
isLinkLocal() in src/ipv6.ts compares the first 64 bits of the address against a literal string:
ts // Zeroes are required, i.e. we can't check isHostInSubnet with 'fe80::/10' if ( this.getBitsBase2(0, 64) === '1111111010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000' ) { return true; }
The comparison requires the first 64 bits to be exactly fe80:0000:0000:0000, so it accepts 2⁶⁴ of the 2¹¹⁸ addresses in fe80::/10. The comment states a premise the library disproves: getType() classifies the same range with isHostInSubnet against the 'fe80::/10': 'Link-local unicast' entry in src/v6/constants.ts, and Address4.isLinkLocal() is a plain isHostInSubnet test against 169.254.0.0/16. RFC 4291 §2.5.6 constrains the format of an autoconfigured link-local address; it does not define the range, and reading it as the definition is the likeliest origin of the /64 comparison.
The IPv4-mapped and NAT64 well-known paths of isLinkLocal() are unaffected: ::ffff:169.254.169.254 and 64:ff9b::a9fe:a9fe are classified by their embedded IPv4 address and report true.
Affected versions
<= 10.5.0. The comparison has had this shape since Address6.isLinkLocal() was introduced, so every release exposing the method is affected.
Impact
Every well-formed address in fe80::/10 outside fe80::/64 is parsed successfully, isValid() is true, and the classifier reports something untrue about it. No other classifier catches these addresses: isPrivate() covers ULA (fc00::/7), not link-local.
| Address | isLinkLocal() | getType() | getScope() | |---|---|---|---| | fe80::1 | true | Link-local unicast | Link local | | fe81::1 | false | Link-local unicast | Link local | | fe8f::1 | false | Link-local unicast | Link local | | febf::1 | false | Link-local unicast | Link local | | fe80:0:0:1::1 | false | Link-local unicast | Link local | | fe80::1:0:0:0:1 | false | Link-local unicast | Link local |
Python's ipaddress module, the IN6ISADDRLINKLOCAL macro in netinet6/in6.h, and Linux's ipv6addrtype() all apply a ten-bit prefix test and classify every row above as link-local.
A request admitted through a guard built on isLinkLocal() reaches a link-local host on the server's own segment: a neighboring machine or the on-link router. An IPv6 link-local destination generally needs a zone index and a neighbor on the same link, so the reach is the server's own segment rather than the internet or a universal metadata endpoint, and the severity reflects that.
Proof of concept
npm i ip-address@10.5.0, then:
js const { Address6 } = require('ip-address');
// A guard of the shape the library documents. function isBlocked(host) { const a = new Address6(host); return a.isLoopback() || a.isLinkLocal() || a.isPrivate() || a.isMulticast() || a.isUnspecified(); }
for (const h of ['fe80::1', 'fe81::1', 'febf::1', 'fe80:0:0:1::1']) { const a = new Address6(h); console.log(isBlocked(h) ? 'BLOCK' : 'ALLOW', h, '-> getType()', a.getType()); }
On affected versions:
BLOCK fe80::1 -> getType() Link-local unicast ALLOW fe81::1 -> getType() Link-local unicast ALLOW febf::1 -> getType() Link-local unicast ALLOW fe80:0:0:1::1 -> getType() Link-local unicast
Remediation
Upgrade to the patched release. In the fix, isLinkLocal() tests the address against fe80::/10 with the same isHostInSubnet predicate getType() and Address4.isLinkLocal() use. The same release adds 2001::/32 to the type table so getType() reports 'Teredo' for the addresses isTeredo() returns true for; that is a consistency correction with no security effect.
If you cannot upgrade immediately, test the range directly:
js const LINKLOCAL = new Address6('fe80::/10'); const linkLocal = new Address6(host).isHostInSubnet(LINKLOCAL);
A note on SSRF defense
These methods are address classifiers, not a complete SSRF defense. Regardless of this fix, a robust SSRF guard must resolve the hostname and validate the resolved IP against the socket it connects to, and account for DNS rebinding and redirects. Treat these checks as one layer, not the only one.
Affected Software
Remediation
Recommended actions to resolve this vulnerability, in priority order.
- Upgrade
Upgrade
npm/ip-addressto a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in 10.5.1 - Upgrade
Upgrade
ip-addressto a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in 10.5.0 - Compensating control
For SSRF defenses, resolve the hostname and validate the resolved IP against the socket it connects to; account for DNS rebinding and redirects, and treat address-classifier checks as only one layer.
Event History
Frequently Asked Questions
Which applications are exposed to meaningful risk?
Applications that use npm/ip-address's Address6.isLinkLocal() to enforce a network trust boundary are exposed. This includes SSRF defenses or other request filters intended to deny access to IPv6 link-local destinations.
What input is needed to trigger the incorrect classification?
An attacker needs to cause the application to evaluate an IPv6 address in fe80::/10 that is outside fe80::/64, such as fe81::1. The method returns false for those addresses even though they are link-local unicast addresses.
How can I determine whether my application is affected?
Review whether Address6.isLinkLocal() is used to allow or deny network requests or internal-address access. Affected behavior can be reproduced with new Address6('fe81::1').isLinkLocal(), which returns false; the same address is identified as link-local by getType(), getScope(), and isHostInSubnet(new Address6('fe80::/10')).
What can be done if updating is not immediately possible?
Do not rely on isLinkLocal() alone for link-local filtering. Check whether the address belongs to fe80::/10, for example with isHostInSubnet(new Address6('fe80::/10')), when making trust-boundary decisions.