nodemailer 10.1.0 → 10.1.1

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
package/CHANGELOG.md CHANGED
@@ -1,5 +1,12 @@
1
1
  # CHANGELOG
2
2
 
3
+ ## [10.1.1](https://github.com/nodemailer/nodemailer/compare/v10.1.0...v10.1.1) (2026-10-14)
4
+
5
+
6
+ ### Bug Fixes
7
+
8
+ * **fetch:** strip credentials on any cross-origin redirect ([a15360c](https://github.com/nodemailer/nodemailer/commit/a15360cd2cd12e4670e96ab0b7290e8c862391cf))
9
+
3
10
  ## [10.1.0](https://github.com/nodemailer/nodemailer/compare/v10.0.16...v10.1.0) (2026-10-10)
4
11
 
5
12
 
package/SECURITY.md CHANGED
@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
1
1
  # Security Policy
2
2
 
3
- Nodemailer is a widely deployed, zero-dependency e-mail library. We take security
4
- reports seriously and aim to respond quickly.
3
+ Nodemailer is a widely deployed, zero-dependency email library. We welcome
4
+ responsible reports of vulnerabilities that present a credible security risk to
5
+ users. Please distinguish security vulnerabilities from ordinary bugs, unusual
6
+ edge cases, and hardening suggestions.
5
7
 
6
8
  ## Supported Versions
7
9
 
@@ -17,45 +19,119 @@ the supported way to receive security updates.
17
19
  If you are on an older major, please upgrade. See the migration notes at
18
20
  <https://nodemailer.com/> before updating.
19
21
 
20
- ## Reporting a Vulnerability
22
+ ## What Qualifies as a Security Vulnerability
21
23
 
22
- **Please do not report security vulnerabilities through public GitHub issues,
23
- pull requests, or discussions.**
24
+ A security report should identify a realistic way for an attacker to cross a
25
+ security boundary in a supported version of Nodemailer. Unexpected behavior,
26
+ a failing test, or a technically correct proof of concept is not sufficient on
27
+ its own to establish security impact.
24
28
 
25
- Report privately through one of the following channels:
29
+ In particular, explain:
26
30
 
27
- 1. **GitHub Security Advisories (preferred).** Open a private report at
28
- <https://github.com/nodemailer/nodemailer/security/advisories/new>. This keeps
29
- the discussion private until a fix is published and lets us credit you.
30
- 2. **Email.** Send details to **andris@reinman.eu** (the contact listed in
31
- [`SECURITY.txt`](SECURITY.txt)). Encrypt sensitive details if possible.
31
+ - **Attacker capabilities:** Who is the attacker, and what inputs, systems, or
32
+ responses can they control _without_ already having the privileges or secrets
33
+ they are trying to gain?
34
+ - **Attack path:** How does attacker-controlled input reach the affected code
35
+ through a supported Nodemailer API or a realistic application integration?
36
+ - **Prerequisites:** What configuration and user actions are required? If the
37
+ attack depends on unusual options or deliberately malformed input, explain
38
+ why those conditions could arise in a real application.
39
+ - **Impact:** What confidentiality, integrity, or availability boundary is
40
+ crossed, and what can the attacker achieve as a result?
32
41
 
33
- When reporting, please include as much of the following as you can:
42
+ A vulnerability involving an optional or less common feature can still qualify
43
+ if these conditions are met. Conversely, the existence of a defensive check in
44
+ the code does not, by itself, establish that every bypass of that check has a
45
+ realistic security impact.
34
46
 
35
- - The affected version(s) and environment (Node.js version, OS).
36
- - The component involved (e.g. SMTP connection, address parsing, MIME/header
37
- generation, DKIM).
38
- - A clear description of the issue and its impact (e.g. header/SMTP command
39
- injection, information disclosure, DoS).
40
- - A minimal proof of concept or reproduction steps.
41
- - Any suggested remediation, if you have one.
47
+ ## Reporting a Vulnerability
42
48
 
43
- Nodemailer is maintained by a single person, so there is no guaranteed response
44
- time: sometimes reports are handled within hours, sometimes they take longer.
45
- Accepted issues are fixed in a new release and coordinated through a GitHub
46
- Security Advisory, and reporters who wish to be named are credited.
49
+ **Do not disclose suspected exploitable vulnerabilities through public GitHub
50
+ issues, pull requests, or discussions before coordinating with the maintainer.**
47
51
 
48
- ## CVEs
52
+ Report privately through one of the following channels:
49
53
 
50
- We track and disclose vulnerabilities through GitHub Security Advisories. We do
51
- not request or manage CVE identifiers ourselves. If you need a CVE assigned for a
52
- reported issue, please request one yourself, for example through GitHub's own
53
- CVE request flow on the published advisory, or another CNA.
54
+ 1. **GitHub Security Advisories (preferred):**
55
+ <https://github.com/nodemailer/nodemailer/security/advisories/new>.
56
+ 2. **Email:** **andris@reinman.eu**, as listed in
57
+ [`SECURITY.txt`](SECURITY.txt). Encrypt sensitive details if possible.
58
+
59
+ ### Required Information
60
+
61
+ Please provide enough information to evaluate both the defect and its security
62
+ impact. Reports should include:
63
+
64
+ 1. The affected Nodemailer version or commit, Node.js version, and relevant
65
+ configuration.
66
+ 2. A concise description of the issue and the affected public API or code path.
67
+ 3. A minimal, tested reproduction, including steps to run it, expected behavior,
68
+ and observed behavior.
69
+ 4. A concrete threat model: attacker control, prerequisites, trust boundary, and
70
+ resulting impact. Clearly distinguish what your reproduction proves from what
71
+ you believe might be possible.
72
+ 5. An explanation of why the issue affects applications beyond a deliberately
73
+ constructed test setup, where this is not obvious.
74
+
75
+ A suggested fix is welcome but does not replace an explanation of exploitability.
76
+ A complete real-world exploit is not always necessary, but the report must make
77
+ a credible security impact clear.
78
+
79
+ ### Reports That May Be Treated as Ordinary Bugs
80
+
81
+ The following generally do **not** qualify for private security handling unless
82
+ you can demonstrate an additional, meaningful security boundary crossing:
83
+
84
+ - Issues that require the attacker to control trusted application code,
85
+ administrator-only configuration, or the secret they supposedly extract.
86
+ - Problems caused solely by application-level misuse, exposed credentials, or
87
+ insecure deployment choices outside Nodemailer's control.
88
+ - Contrived proof-of-concept setups where the tester controls both sides of a
89
+ request, without explaining how a separate attacker could trigger the issue.
90
+ - Parser quirks, unexpected behavior, and bypasses of internal checks with no
91
+ demonstrated security impact.
92
+ - Speculative findings based only on static analysis or an automated tool's
93
+ assessment, without a verified reproduction and credible attack scenario.
94
+
95
+ These may still be valid bugs and may be considered through the normal issue
96
+ tracker. Please coordinate before making any potentially exploitable details
97
+ public. Classification as a bug does not guarantee a fix or a particular
98
+ priority.
99
+
100
+ ### Automated and AI-Assisted Reports
101
+
102
+ Automated analysis and AI tools are welcome as research aids, but the person
103
+ submitting a report is responsible for verifying its claims. **Do not submit
104
+ bulk, unverified, or speculative AI-generated findings.** Test each finding
105
+ against a supported release and establish the actual security impact. Reports
106
+ that do not meet the requirements above may be closed without further
107
+ investigation or individual feedback; they can be resubmitted with stronger
108
+ evidence.
109
+
110
+ ## Triage and Disclosure
111
+
112
+ Nodemailer is maintained by a single person, and there is **no guaranteed
113
+ response or resolution time**. Reports are prioritized based on demonstrated
114
+ impact, exploitability, affected usage, and available maintenance resources.
115
+
116
+ A private report does not automatically become a security advisory. Confirmed
117
+ vulnerabilities may be fixed and disclosed through GitHub Security Advisories;
118
+ other findings may be closed, deferred, or handled as ordinary bugs. Please do
119
+ not disclose details of an unresolved, potentially exploitable issue publicly
120
+ without coordinating with the maintainer.
121
+
122
+ ## CVEs and Credit
123
+
124
+ We do not request or manage CVE identifiers. A report being acknowledged, a bug
125
+ being fixed, or a pull request being merged does **not** mean that Nodemailer
126
+ has confirmed a security vulnerability or endorsed a CVE assignment. We do not
127
+ guarantee advisories, CVE identifiers, or public credit for reports. For
128
+ confirmed vulnerabilities disclosed through an advisory, substantive reporters
129
+ may be credited if they wish.
54
130
 
55
131
  ## Scope
56
132
 
57
133
  In scope: the `nodemailer` package source in this repository: message and MIME
58
- generation, SMTP/LMTP client behaviour, address parsing, header handling, DKIM
134
+ generation, SMTP/LMTP client behavior, address parsing, header handling, DKIM
59
135
  signing, and the bundled transports.
60
136
 
61
137
  Out of scope: vulnerabilities in your own application code, misconfiguration of
@@ -116,6 +116,10 @@ function parseFetchUrl(url) {
116
116
  }
117
117
  return parsed;
118
118
  }
119
+ // the port a request to the URL goes to, explicit or the default of its scheme
120
+ function fetchPort(parsed) {
121
+ return parsed.port ? Number(parsed.port) : parsed.protocol === 'https:' ? 443 : 80;
122
+ }
119
123
  function nmfetch(url, options) {
120
124
  options = options || {};
121
125
  options.fetchRes = options.fetchRes || new node_stream_1.PassThrough();
@@ -232,7 +236,7 @@ function nmfetch(url, options) {
232
236
  method,
233
237
  host: parsed.hostname,
234
238
  path: parsed.path,
235
- port: parsed.port ? parsed.port : parsed.protocol === 'https:' ? 443 : 80,
239
+ port: fetchPort(parsed),
236
240
  headers,
237
241
  // Validate TLS certificates by default. Callers that genuinely need to
238
242
  // reach a self-signed/internal host opt out explicitly with
@@ -334,17 +338,19 @@ function nmfetch(url, options) {
334
338
  // the shared fetchRes once it times out. Callers listen with req.once().
335
339
  return fail(new Error('Unsupported protocol for URL ' + redirectUrl), redirectUrl);
336
340
  }
337
- // Do not forward credentials when the redirect leaves the original
338
- // security context: a different host, or a downgrade from https to
339
- // http (which would otherwise put them on the wire in cleartext).
340
- // Strip sensitive request headers so an attacker who controls the
341
- // redirect target cannot harvest them.
342
- const crossHost = redirectParsed.hostname !== parsed.hostname;
343
- const downgrade = parsed.protocol === 'https:' && redirectParsed.protocol === 'http:';
344
- if (options.headers && (crossHost || downgrade)) {
341
+ // Do not forward credentials when the redirect leaves the origin: a different
342
+ // scheme, host or port is a different security context (an https to http
343
+ // downgrade would also put them on the wire in cleartext). Strip sensitive
344
+ // request headers so an attacker who controls the redirect target cannot
345
+ // harvest them.
346
+ const crossOrigin = redirectParsed.protocol !== parsed.protocol ||
347
+ redirectParsed.hostname !== parsed.hostname ||
348
+ fetchPort(redirectParsed) !== fetchPort(parsed);
349
+ if (options.headers && crossOrigin) {
345
350
  const sensitive = ['authorization', 'cookie', 'proxy-authorization'];
346
351
  Object.keys(options.headers).forEach(key => {
347
- if (sensitive.includes(key.toLowerCase())) {
352
+ // normalized the way the request headers are built above, a padded name is sent too
353
+ if (sensitive.includes(key.toLowerCase().trim())) {
348
354
  delete options.headers[key];
349
355
  }
350
356
  });
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
1
1
  export declare const name = "nodemailer";
2
- export declare const version = "10.1.0";
2
+ export declare const version = "10.1.1";
3
3
  export declare const homepage = "https://nodemailer.com/";
@@ -3,5 +3,5 @@
3
3
  Object.defineProperty(exports, "__esModule", { value: true });
4
4
  exports.homepage = exports.version = exports.name = void 0;
5
5
  exports.name = 'nodemailer';
6
- exports.version = '10.1.0';
6
+ exports.version = '10.1.1';
7
7
  exports.homepage = 'https://nodemailer.com/';
@@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ function parseFetchUrl(url) {
78
78
  }
79
79
  return parsed;
80
80
  }
81
+ // the port a request to the URL goes to, explicit or the default of its scheme
82
+ function fetchPort(parsed) {
83
+ return parsed.port ? Number(parsed.port) : parsed.protocol === 'https:' ? 443 : 80;
84
+ }
81
85
  function nmfetch(url, options) {
82
86
  options = options || {};
83
87
  options.fetchRes = options.fetchRes || new PassThrough();
@@ -194,7 +198,7 @@ function nmfetch(url, options) {
194
198
  method,
195
199
  host: parsed.hostname,
196
200
  path: parsed.path,
197
- port: parsed.port ? parsed.port : parsed.protocol === 'https:' ? 443 : 80,
201
+ port: fetchPort(parsed),
198
202
  headers,
199
203
  // Validate TLS certificates by default. Callers that genuinely need to
200
204
  // reach a self-signed/internal host opt out explicitly with
@@ -296,17 +300,19 @@ function nmfetch(url, options) {
296
300
  // the shared fetchRes once it times out. Callers listen with req.once().
297
301
  return fail(new Error('Unsupported protocol for URL ' + redirectUrl), redirectUrl);
298
302
  }
299
- // Do not forward credentials when the redirect leaves the original
300
- // security context: a different host, or a downgrade from https to
301
- // http (which would otherwise put them on the wire in cleartext).
302
- // Strip sensitive request headers so an attacker who controls the
303
- // redirect target cannot harvest them.
304
- const crossHost = redirectParsed.hostname !== parsed.hostname;
305
- const downgrade = parsed.protocol === 'https:' && redirectParsed.protocol === 'http:';
306
- if (options.headers && (crossHost || downgrade)) {
303
+ // Do not forward credentials when the redirect leaves the origin: a different
304
+ // scheme, host or port is a different security context (an https to http
305
+ // downgrade would also put them on the wire in cleartext). Strip sensitive
306
+ // request headers so an attacker who controls the redirect target cannot
307
+ // harvest them.
308
+ const crossOrigin = redirectParsed.protocol !== parsed.protocol ||
309
+ redirectParsed.hostname !== parsed.hostname ||
310
+ fetchPort(redirectParsed) !== fetchPort(parsed);
311
+ if (options.headers && crossOrigin) {
307
312
  const sensitive = ['authorization', 'cookie', 'proxy-authorization'];
308
313
  Object.keys(options.headers).forEach(key => {
309
- if (sensitive.includes(key.toLowerCase())) {
314
+ // normalized the way the request headers are built above, a padded name is sent too
315
+ if (sensitive.includes(key.toLowerCase().trim())) {
310
316
  delete options.headers[key];
311
317
  }
312
318
  });
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
1
1
  export declare const name = "nodemailer";
2
- export declare const version = "10.1.0";
2
+ export declare const version = "10.1.1";
3
3
  export declare const homepage = "https://nodemailer.com/";
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
1
1
  // Generated by scripts/build.js from package.json. Do not edit by hand.
2
2
  export const name = 'nodemailer';
3
- export const version = '10.1.0';
3
+ export const version = '10.1.1';
4
4
  export const homepage = 'https://nodemailer.com/';
package/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "nodemailer",
3
- "version": "10.1.0",
3
+ "version": "10.1.1",
4
4
  "description": "Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications",
5
5
  "type": "module",
6
6
  "main": "./dist/cjs/nodemailer.js",
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@
151
151
  },
152
152
  "homepage": "https://nodemailer.com/",
153
153
  "devDependencies": {
154
- "@aws-sdk/client-sesv2": "3.1146.0",
154
+ "@aws-sdk/client-sesv2": "3.1151.0",
155
155
  "@types/node": "20.19.43",
156
156
  "bunyan": "1.8.15",
157
157
  "c8": "12.0.0",
@@ -161,14 +161,14 @@
161
161
  "libbase64": "1.3.2",
162
162
  "libmime": "5.4.7",
163
163
  "libqp": "2.1.2",
164
- "mailauth": "7.1.1",
165
- "prettier": "3.9.9",
164
+ "mailauth": "7.3.0",
165
+ "prettier": "3.9.10",
166
166
  "proxy": "1.0.2",
167
167
  "proxy-test-server": "1.0.0",
168
- "smtp-server": "3.19.17",
168
+ "smtp-server": "3.19.21",
169
169
  "tsx": "4.23.15",
170
170
  "typescript": "6.0.3",
171
- "typescript-eslint": "8.71.1"
171
+ "typescript-eslint": "8.71.2"
172
172
  },
173
173
  "engines": {
174
174
  "node": ">=20.0.0"