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:

next js environmental variables

How to configure Next.js environmental variables

Learn how to manage environment variables in Next.js, which influence how an application behaves in different contexts and environments.

Joseph Mawa
Apr 25, 2025 ⋅ 9 min read
useActionState in React

useActionState in React: A practical guide with examples

Discover how React’s useActionState Hook makes it easier to handle user actions, especially form submissions and async state changes.

Rishi Purwar
Apr 25, 2025 ⋅ 5 min read
three js vs babylon js

Three.js vs. Babylon.js: Which is better for 3D web development?

Compare two libraries that support creating 3D experiences in the browser. Learn how to get started with each, their core features, and key differences.

Elijah Asaolu
Apr 24, 2025 ⋅ 7 min read
how to use the Next.js Image component to optimize images

How to use the Next.js Image component to optimize images

Explore automatic image optimization using Next Image, the built-in image optimization solution for Next.js.

Adebiyi Adedotun
Apr 23, 2025 ⋅ 7 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