Skip to content

Angular: SSR XSS via Unescaped <template> Content Across DocumentFragment Boundaries in Fallback Raw-Content Elements

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Aug 27, 2026 in angular/angular • Updated Sep 10, 2026

Package

npm @angular/platform-server (npm)

Affected versions

>= 22.0.0, < 22.1.4
>= 21.0.0, < 21.2.22
>= 20.0.0, < 20.3.30
<= 19.2.25

Patched versions

22.1.4
21.2.22
20.3.30

Description

Summary

An XSS vulnerability exists in @angular/platform-server during server-side rendering (SSR) HTML serialization when traversing ancestor tags across <template> element boundaries. When an application renders untrusted user input within raw-text tags (<xmp>, <style>, <script>), comments, or text nodes inside a <template> that is nested within a fallback raw-content element (<noscript>, <iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>), matching closing tags (e.g., </noscript>) are not escaped during HTML serialization. When rendered in a browser, this unescaped closing tag prematurely terminates the fallback container and executes trailing markup as active DOM elements.

Technical Description

In HTML5 parsing, fallback raw-content elements (<noscript>, <iframe>, <noembed>, <noframes>) place the browser's tokenizer into RAWTEXT mode. In this mode, inner content is parsed as literal text until an end tag matching the container tag name (e.g., </noscript>) is encountered.

To prevent XSS breakout vectors during SSR serialization, the DOM serializer inspects a node's ancestors to escape any matching fallback closing tags (</tag -> &lt;/tag). However:

  1. Per DOM specifications, the children of a <template> element reside in a separate DocumentFragment (template.content), whose own parentNode is null.
  2. The serializer's ancestor traversal previously only inspected element nodes. When traversing upward from a node inside template.content, traversal terminated immediately at the DocumentFragment boundary.
  3. Because traversal stopped before reaching the outer document tree, enclosing fallback raw-content ancestors (such as <noscript> or <iframe>) were not discovered. As a result, closing sequences like </noscript> within <template> content were emitted unescaped.

Impact & Reachability

  • Framework Guarantee Bypass: Angular guarantees that standard text interpolation ({{ userInput }} bound as element text content) is safe by default without manual sanitization. This vulnerability bypasses that guarantee during SSR HTML serialization when untrusted input is interpolated inside template content within fallback containers.
  • Template Authoring: Writing literal <xmp> or <style> directly inside a component's <template> markup requires relaxed template schema checks (CUSTOM_ELEMENTS_SCHEMA or NO_ERRORS_SCHEMA). However, standard HTML comments and text nodes inside <template> within <noscript> are reachable without relaxed schemas.
  • Imperative DOM Construction: Components or directives that construct DOM structures imperatively via Renderer2 bypass template compiler schema checks entirely and are unconditionally affected.

Proof of Concept (Minimal Reproduction)

import { Component } from '@angular/core';

@Component({
  selector: 'app-root',
  standalone: true,
  template: `
    <noscript>
      <template>
        <xmp>{{ payload }}</xmp>
      </template>
    </noscript>
  `
})
export class AppComponent {
  // Attacker-controlled input bound via standard text interpolation
  payload = '</noscript><img src=x onerror=alert("SSR_TEMPLATE_XSS")>';
}

Vulnerable SSR Output:

<noscript><template><xmp></noscript><img src=x onerror=alert("SSR_TEMPLATE_XSS")></xmp></template></noscript>

Workarounds

  • Avoid rendering untrusted user input inside <template> elements nested within <noscript>, <iframe>, <noembed>, or <noframes> in server-rendered templates.
  • Avoid programmatic DOM assembly of <template> elements inside fallback containers when handling untrusted data.

References

@alan-agius4 alan-agius4 published to angular/angular Aug 27, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 10, 2026
Reviewed Sep 10, 2026
Last updated Sep 10, 2026

Severity

High

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 None
User interaction Passive
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
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:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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.
(51st 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.

Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output

The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-88060

GHSA ID

GHSA-v3p8-whq6-r5jg

Source code

Credits

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