2021-11-01
2092
Godson Obielum
75053
Nov 1, 2021 ⋅ 7 min read

How to protect against regex denial-of-service (ReDoS) attacks

Godson Obielum I'm a software developer with a life goal of using technology as a tool for solving problems across major industries.

Recent posts:

A Comprehensive Guide To JavaScript Generators

A comprehensive guide to JavaScript generators

JavaScript generators offer a powerful and often overlooked way to handle asynchronous operations, manage state, and process data streams.

Fimber Elemuwa
Jan 24, 2025 ⋅ 8 min read
​​Solving Micro-Frontend Challenges With Module Federation

​​Solving micro-frontend challenges with Module Federation

webpack’s Module Federation allows you to easily share code and dependencies between applications, helpful in micro-frontend architecture.

Peter Aideloje
Jan 23, 2025 ⋅ 7 min read
typescript object destructuring

TypeScript object destructuring and you

Whether you’re part of the typed club or not, one function within TypeScript that can make life a lot easier is object destructuring.

Lewis Cianci
Jan 22, 2025 ⋅ 5 min read
master state management hydration Nuxt usestate

Nuxt state management and hydration with useState

useState can effectively replace ref in many scenarios and prevent Nuxt hydration mismatches that can lead to unexpected behavior and errors.

Yan Sun
Jan 20, 2025 ⋅ 8 min read
View all posts

One Reply to "How to protect against regex denial-of-service (ReDoS) attacks"

  1. Interesting article.

    Your explanation is wrong though. \w+\s* does not return “A long sentence with invalid characters that takes so much time to be matched that it potentially causes our CPU usage to increase”. it matches “A “, because \w is only a single char, so \w+ matches as many word char are available (in this case just the letter A), then \s* matches as many spaces as possible (just one in this case), the result is “A “. then (\w+\s*)* matches the whole string. It matches as many “at least one word char followed by 0 or more space”. The rest of your explanation is therefore erroneous.

    Too bad also your solution is not a real solution. It rejects rapidly the sequence with invalid chars, but it also reject any sequence with valid char ! In fact, this formula will never match anything but the empty string. This is due to the fact that you reference the 1st group from within the first group (the \1 is within the first pair of ()). If you define the first group as “The first group is the first group plus the repetition of itself”, the only solution is the empty group.

    A solution that works to you problem is “an optional blank separated list of words plus one word” and it’s spelled like this :
    /^(\w+\s+)*\w+$/
    which can be decoded as :
    ^: start
    (…)* repeat 0 or more time
    \w+: at least one word char
    \s+: at least one space char :
    \w+: followed by at least one word char
    $: then end

    It instantly matches “correct”
    it instantly matches “this is a list of word”
    it instantly does not match “this is an invalid list!”
    it instantly does not match “A long sentence with invalid characters that takes soo much time to be matched that it potentially causes our CPU usage to increase drastically!!!”

Leave a Reply