Skip to content

Mermaid does not properly sanitize architecture diagram iconText leading to XSS

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Aug 19, 2025 in mermaid-js/mermaid • Updated Aug 20, 2025

Package

npm mermaid (npm)

Affected versions

>= 11.1.0, < 11.10.0

Patched versions

11.10.0

Description

Summary

In the default configuration of mermaid 11.9.0, user supplied input for architecture diagram icons is passed to the d3 html() method, creating a sink for cross site scripting.

Details

Architecture diagram service iconText values are passed to the d3 html() method, allowing malicious users to inject arbitrary HTML and cause XSS when mermaid-js is used in it's default configuration.

The vulnerability lies here:

export const drawServices = async function (
  db: ArchitectureDB,
  elem: D3Element,
  services: ArchitectureService[]
): Promise<number> {
  for (const service of services) {
    /** ... **/
    } else if (service.iconText) {
      bkgElem.html(
        `<g>${await getIconSVG('blank', { height: iconSize, width: iconSize, fallbackPrefix: architectureIcons.prefix })}</g>`
      );
      const textElemContainer = bkgElem.append('g');
      const fo = textElemContainer
        .append('foreignObject')
        .attr('width', iconSize)
        .attr('height', iconSize);
      const divElem = fo
        .append('div')
        .attr('class', 'node-icon-text')
        .attr('style', `height: ${iconSize}px;`)
        .append('div')
        .html(service.iconText); // <- iconText passed into innerHTML
       /** ... **/
};
};

This issue was introduced with 734bde38777c9190a5a72e96421c83424442d4e4, around 15 months ago, which was released in v11.1.0.

PoC

Render the following diagram and observe the modified DOM.

architecture-beta
    group api(cloud)[API]
    service db "<img src=x onerror=\"document.write(`xss on ${document.domain}`)\">" [Database] in api

Here is a PoC on mermaid.live: https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNo9T8FOwzAM_ZXI4rBJpWrpRtuIISF24caZZdKyxOsiLUnlJjCo-u9kQ8wX-_n5-dkjKK8ROEhSRxNQhUh4v8cghWMpOvKxZ7I3M3XyUc83L-9v2z9qQPo0CpneMwFPxnZsILU6M--QyNNKCAHaq2jRhfyL0vLZ7jwMiWd3443Q3krjpt38Mv4sgG3WMsi9HHDLjLs4CwcZdGQ08EARM7BISZMgjJdLBIQjWhTAU6nxIOMpCBBuSrJeug_v7b8yPdMdgR_kaUgo9loGXBvZkbS3LqHTSK8-ugC8LMrrEuAjnIEvlnlVL9q6rZu6Lh-rRQbfwKuyyZuybcvqIaWiqKcMfq6uRd7Uy-kXhYFzcA

Impact

XSS on all sites that use mermaid and render user supplied diagrams without further sanitization.

Remediation

Sanitize the value of iconText before passing it to html().

References

@sidharthv96 sidharthv96 published to mermaid-js/mermaid Aug 19, 2025
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Aug 19, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Aug 19, 2025
Reviewed Aug 19, 2025
Last updated Aug 20, 2025

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction Passive
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity Low
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(12th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2025-54880

GHSA ID

GHSA-8gwm-58g9-j8pw

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.