JavaScript DOM XSS via fetch().json() → insertAdjacentHTML not detected by CodeQL
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100
- Issue type
- Bug
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Activity status
- Stale
- Tech stack
- javascript
- Domain
- security
Research direction
Start with the JavaScript security-extended query suite and review how fetch().json() responses and insertAdjacentHTML are modeled. Determine whether this flow is intentionally excluded or needs source and sink modeling, then validate the conclusion against the supplied example and confirm whether an XSS result is expected.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Description of the false positive
We are trying to better understand the design decisions behind JavaScript XSS detection in CodeQL, specifically around taint sources involving network responses.
I have a piece of client-side JavaScript that builds HTML using insertAdjacentHTML with values coming from a fetch().json() response. From an application-security perspective, this is treated as a potential DOM XSS risk in our project, but CodeQL does not report it.
I’d like to confirm whether this behavior is by design, and if so, what the recommended way is to model this trust boundary.
Code samples or links to source code
function loadMessageLogs(pageSize, continuationToken) {
let url = '?handler=LoadMessageLogs&pageSize=' + pageSize;
if (continuationToken)
url += '&continuationToken=' + encodeURIComponent(continuationToken);
fetch(url)
.then(response => response.json())
.then(data => {
const tbody = document.querySelector("#tblMessageLogs tbody");
tbody.innerHTML = "";
if (!data.items || data.items.length === 0) {
messageLogs.hidden = true;
noMessageLogs.hidden = false;
}
else {
data.items.forEach(item => {
const link = `<a href="/MessageLogs/Details/${item.messageId}">View message</a>`;
const row = `<tr>
<td>${item.createdDate}</td>
<td>${item.messageId}</td>
<td>${item.interfaceId ?? ''}</td>
<td>${item.target ?? ''}</td>
<td>${item.mpanCore ?? ''}</td>
<td>${item.meterId ?? ''}</td>
<td>${link}</td>
</tr>`;
tbody.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeend', row);
});
PagingModule.updatePaging(data.continuationToken)
messageLogs.hidden = false;
noMessageLogs.hidden = true;
}
});
}
In our case, data.items[*] ultimately contains data that may originate from user input stored and returned by the backend.
- We are running the javascript-security-extended query suite.
- No XSS issue is reported for this code.
- Dominant language
- CodeQL
- Stars
- 10.1k
- Forks
- 2.1k
- Avg merge
- 2d 16h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 143
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from github/codeql
-
agentic-workflows
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
-
false-positive javascript
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
-
C#: cs/simplifiable-boolean-expression false positive on Nullable<bool> compared with a literal Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
false-positive
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
punkpeye/mcp-remote#369 ·
-
Mend: dependency security vulnerability untriaged
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 86/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
-
bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
cisagov/vulnrichment#337 ·
-
bug DUP Reservations
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
bcgov/reserve-rec-public#896 ·