Vulnerability · GHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h
Nodemailer: A ">" inside a quoted local part ends an angle-addr early in addressparser, delivering to a domain the header does not name
Published Oct 23, 2026 · catalog updated Oct 23, 2026 · Nodemailer: A ">" inside
Last checked Oct 24, 2026, 12 days ago.
Open the advisory
Exploitation likelihood is not on this record for GHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h. A missing EPSS score is not a low risk. Compare Nodemailer: A ">" inside with the linked advisory before you change production.
Gaps on this record
- The stored product name is a package slug. The name on this page is taken from the title (Nodemailer: A ">" inside).
- No vendor fix or required action is stored. Compare the linked advisory before you change production.
- EPSS is missing. A missing score is not a low risk.
- Severity
- Medium6.5
- Known exploitation
- Not in CISA/VulnCheck KEV
- EPSS
- Awaiting synchronization with FIRST
- Remediation
- Version ranges on file
- Affected products
- npm nodemailer
### Vulnerability summary addressparser ends an angle-addr at the first it sees, including one inside a quoted local part, a comment or a domain literal. The domain is then read off the text in front of that . is the mailbox under RFC 5322, and Nodemailer read it as an address at . The unbracketed spelling of the same value was already read correctly. Affected: 3.0.0 through 10.1.3. ### Attacker capabilities The attacker controls the text of a recipient or sender address that an application passes to Nodemailer, for example a To value entered in a contact or invite form, or the header of an inbound message parsed with mailparser. No access to the application, its configuration or its credentials is needed. The value is a syntactically valid RFC 5322 address that conformant parsers accept without defects. ### Realistic exploitation scenario An application lets users send invitations or notifications only to addresses at an allowed domain and validates the submitted value with a conformant parser or by checking its domain. The attacker submits , which validates as a mailbox. Nodemailer then parses the same value, issues and the message, with whatever content the application puts into it, is delivered to the attacker's domain. The security boundary crossed is the application's recipient allow list. In the inbound direction, mailparser reports a different address than a conformant reader of the same header, so a display or policy layer built on the two disagrees. ### Proof of concept Python's reads the same value as , with no defects reported. The envelope a message gets is built from the same parse, so issues the RCPT TO shown above. ### Security impact Mail that an application intends for an allowed domain is delivered to a domain chosen by the attacker, which discloses its content. It is a security vulnerability rather than a parsing bug because the misreading only occurs for values that a conformant validator approves, so validation done the right way is bypassed. A
Are you affected?
Enter the version you run. The result uses only the ranges stored on this record.
The check returns affected, not affected, or incomplete. It does not guess a version that is missing from the record.
- npm nodemailer>= 3.0.0, < 10.1.4
How to fix GHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h
Upgrade
GHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h lists a fix boundary at 10.1.4. Compare the installed build with that boundary before you change production.
Version check
Affected < 10.1.4
Official advisories
What to do
Three questions, each answered from this record only. Confirm the vendor advisory before you patch.
Should you patch?
Exploitation likelihood is not on this record for GHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h. A missing EPSS score is not a low risk. Compare Nodemailer: A ">" inside with the linked advisory before you change production.
Which versions are affected?
Compare what you have installed with >= 3.0.0, < 10.1.4. Compare the installed version with the linked vendor advisory before you change production.
What should an analyst verify?
CWE-20: Improper Input Validation; CWE-436. EPSS is not on this record yet. There is no CISA KEV listing. No Exploit-DB or Metasploit reference is linked. Use the source links for the original advisory.
Code
The project this record applies to. Exploit listings stay in References.
Timeline
Detection, updates, and resolution for this record.
Oct 23, 2026 · GitHub Advisory Database
Detected
### Vulnerability summary addressparser ends an angle-addr at the first it sees, including one inside a quoted local part, a comment or a domain literal. The domain is then read off the text in front of that . is the mailbox under RFC 5322, and Nodemailer read it as an address at . The unbracketed spelling of the same value was already read correctly. Affected: 3.0.0 through 10.1.3. ### Attacker c
Oct 23, 2026 · GitHub Advisory Database
Updated
### Vulnerability summary addressparser ends an angle-addr at the first it sees, including one inside a quoted local part, a comment or a domain literal. The domain is then read off the text in front of that . is the mailbox under RFC 5322, and Nodemailer read it as an address at . The unbracketed spelling of the same value was already read correctly. Affected: 3.0.0 through 10.1.3. ### Attacker c
Sources
- GitHub Advisory DatabasePackage advisoryGHSA-85x2-q946-cp5h
Nodemailer: A ">" inside a quoted local part ends an angle-addr early in addressparser, delivering to a domain the header does not name
github.com
References
Freshness
Last verified in this catalog Oct 23, 2026. Significant claims (KEV, EPSS, CVSS, affected ranges) come from the source rows above — open the original publisher for the authoritative advisory.
- GitHub Advisory DatabaseOct 24, 2026