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:

react 19.2 what is new and what to expect

React 19.2 is here: Activity API, useEffectEvent and more

Discover what’s new in React 19.2, which features long-awaited features like the Activity API and the useEffectEvent Hook.

David Omotayo
Oct 13, 2025 ⋅ 7 min read
ai dev tool power rankings

AI dev tool power rankings & comparison [Oct 2025]

Compare the top AI development tools and models of October September 2025. View updated rankings, feature breakdowns, and find the best fit for you.

Chizaram Ken
Oct 13, 2025 ⋅ 9 min read

Hooks vs. Signals: The great reactivity convergence explained

React Hooks and SolidJS Signals solve reactivity differently. Learn how each manages state and updates, and when to choose one approach over the other.

Isaac Okoro
Oct 10, 2025 ⋅ 4 min read

Exploring the new Chakra UI MCP Server

Discover how the Chakra UI MCP server integrates AI into your editor, reducing context switching and accelerating development by fetching real-time documentation, component data, and code insights directly in-app.

Emmanuel John
Oct 9, 2025 ⋅ 6 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