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:

gemini 3 and antigravity

A developer’s guide to Antigravity and Gemini 3

Check out Google’s latest AI releases, Gemini and the Antigravity AI IDE. Understand what’s new, how they work, and how they can reshape your development workflow.

Elijah Asaolu
Dec 4, 2025 ⋅ 6 min read
bun 1.3 javascript runtime what's new

Bun 1.3: Is it time for devs to rethink the Node stack?

Learn about Bun 1.3, which marks a shift from fast runtime to full JS toolchain—and see the impact of Anthropic’s acquisition of Bun.

Alex Merced
Dec 4, 2025 ⋅ 9 min read

Stop using JavaScript to solve CSS problems

Stop defaulting to JavaScript. Modern CSS handles virtualization, responsive layouts, and scroll animations better than ever – with far less code.

Chizaram Ken
Dec 4, 2025 ⋅ 7 min read
replay december 3

The Replay (12/3/25): React’s next era, AI code review tools, and more

React’s next era, AI code review tools, and more: discover what’s new in The Replay, LogRocket’s newsletter for dev and engineering leaders, in the December 3rd issue.

Matt MacCormack
Dec 3, 2025 ⋅ 30 sec 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

Hey there, want to help make our blog better?

Join LogRocket’s Content Advisory Board. You’ll help inform the type of content we create and get access to exclusive meetups, social accreditation, and swag.

Sign up now