phlex

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Summary

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

Our filter to detect and prevent the use of the javascript: URL scheme in the href attribute of an <a> tag could be bypassed with tab \t or newline \n characters between the characters of the protocol, e.g. java\tscript:.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

Mitigation

The best way to mitigate this vulnerability is to update to one of the following versions:

• 1.10.1
• 1.9.2
• 1.8.3
• 1.7.2
• 1.6.3
• 1.5.3
• 1.4.2

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

Impact

During a security audit conducted with Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex, we identified three specific ways to bypass the XSS (cross-site-scripting) protection built into Phlex.

1. The first bypass could happen if user-provided attributes with string keys were splatted into HTML tag, e.g. div(**user_attributes).
2. The second bypass could happen if user-provided tag names were passed to the tag method, e.g. tag(some_tag_name_from_user).
3. The third bypass could happen if user’s links were passed to href attributes, e.g. a(href: user_provided_link).

All three of these patterns are meant to be safe and all have now been patched.

Patches

Phlex has patched all three issues and introduced new tests that run against Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

The patched versions are:

• 2.4.1
• 2.3.2
• 2.2.2
• 2.1.3
• 2.0.2
• 1.11.1

Phlex has also patched the main branch in GitHub.

Workarounds

If a project uses a secure CSP (content security policy) or if the application doesn’t use any of the above patterns, it is not at risk.

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browser are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user.

h1(**JSON.parse(user_attributes))

Patches

Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year.

• 1.10.2
• 1.9.3

If you are on main, it has been patched since da8f943

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.

References

In addition to upgrading to a patched version of Phlex, we strongly recommend configuring a Content Security Policy header that does not allow unsafe-inline. Here’s how you can configure a Content Security Policy header in Rails. https://guides.rubyonrails.org/security.html#content-security-policy-header

Summary

There is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data.

Our filter to detect and prevent the use of the javascript: URL scheme in the href attribute of an <a> tag could be bypassed with tab \t or newline \n characters between the characters of the protocol, e.g. java\tscript:.

Impact

If you render an <a> tag with an href attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user.

a(href: user_profile) { "Profile" }

Mitigation

The best way to mitigate this vulnerability is to update to one of the following versions:

• 1.10.1
• 1.9.2
• 1.8.3
• 1.7.2
• 1.6.3
• 1.5.3
• 1.4.2

Workarounds

Configuring a Content Security Policy that does not allow unsafe-inline would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited.