CVE-2026-32304
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedLocutus brings stdlibs of other programming languages to JavaScript for educational purposes. Prior to 3.0.14, the create_function(args, code) function passes both parameters directly to the Function constructor without any sanitization, allowing arbitrary code execution. This is distinct from CVE-2026-29091 which was call_user_func_array using eval() in v2.x. This finding affects create_function using new Function() in v3.x. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.0.14.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe create_function(args, code) function in Locutus versions prior to 3.0.14 passes both parameters directly to JavaScript's Function constructor without any sanitization, enabling arbitrary code execution by crafting malicious input for the code parameter.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 3.0.14CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check Locutus versionRun 'npm list locutus' or check package.json for the installed version of the locutus packageAffected if The installed version is lower than 3.0.14 (e.g., 3.0.13, 3.0.12, etc.)
-
Identify create_function usageSearch codebase for imports or requires of 'create_function' from Locutus (e.g., 'const { create_function } = require("locutus")' or 'import { create_function } from "locutus"') and any function callsAffected if The create_function function from Locutus is imported and called in the codebase
-
Verify input source to create_functionInspect all call sites where create_function is invoked and trace the source of the 'args' and 'code' parametersAffected if Either parameter accepts data from user input, HTTP requests, file uploads, or any external source without validation
You are affected if Locutus version is below 3.0.14 AND your code calls create_function with untrusted or external input as either the args or code parameter.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped3.0.14
Upgrade to Locutus version 3.0.14 or later. If upgrading is not immediately possible, avoid using create_function with untrusted input and implement input validation as a temporary measure.
3.0.14
- Upgrade Locutus to version 3.0.14 or later by updating your package.json or lock file
- Run `npm update locutus` or `npm install [email protected]` to install the fixed version
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version with `npm list locutus`
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-32304 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-32304 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data