agentleFS
ajtazerajtazer/heckit/skills/cve-hunting/redos/SKILL.md

redos

Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Detect Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) where crafted input causes catastrophic backtracking in regex patterns applied to user-controlled strings.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    MUST measure actual backtracking growth rate: Do not report based on pattern structure alone.

    line 26
  2. Distinctive:

    Look for these red flags:

    line 100
  3. Very specific:

    Check ini_get('pcre.backtrack_limit') -- if lowered, may limit impact.

    line 175
  4. Very specific:

    No built-in timeout in Pattern.compile().

    line 179

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

ReDoS Detection

When to Use

Audit input validation libraries, URL/email/date parsers, sanitization utilities, template engines, and any package that applies regular expressions to user-controlled strings.

Critical Rule

MUST measure actual backtracking growth rate. Do not report based on pattern structure alone. The validator.js lesson: assumed ReDoS from pattern complexity but could not confirm exponential growth. Always TIME IT.

Vulnerable Regex Patterns

Nested Quantifiers (Most Common)

(a+)+$          # Nested plus -- classic ReDoS
(a*)*$          # Nested star
(a+)*$          # Star of plus
(a*)+$          # Plus of star
(a{1,}){1,}$   # Nested bounded quantifiers

Overlapping Alternation

(a|a)+$         # Identical alternatives
(a|ab)+$        # Prefix overlap
(a|b|ab)+$      # Partial overlap
(\w|\d)+$       # \d is subset of \w -- overlap

Quantified Groups with Optional Elements

(a+b?)+$        # Optional between repeated groups
(\s*,\s*)+$     # Common in CSV/list parsing
([^"]*"[^"]*")*[^"]*$  # Quote matching

Dangerous Real-World Patterns

^([a-zA-Z0-9])(([\-.]|[_]+)?([a-zA-Z0-9]+))*$    # Email local part
^((https?|ftp):\/\/)?([\w.-]+)\.([a-z.]{2,6}).*$  # URL validation
^\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}$              # IP (safe but often combined)

Evil String Construction

PatternEvil StringGrowth
(a+)+$"a" * N + "!"O(2^N)
(a+b?)+$"a" * N + "!"O(2^N)
(a|aa)+$"a" * N + "!"O(2^N)
([a-zA-Z]+)*$"a" * N + "1"O(2^N)
(\s+$)" " * N + "x"O(N^2) quadratic
(.*a){10}$"a" * N + "!"O(N^10) polynomial

Key insight: The evil string is N copies of a character the pattern CAN match, followed by one character it CANNOT. This forces the engine to try every possible split of the N characters across the quantifiers.

Process

Step 1: Find Regex Usage

# JavaScript/TypeScript
grep -rn "new RegExp\|RegExp(" . --include="*.js" --include="*.ts"
grep -rn "\.match(\|\.test(\|\.replace(\|\.search(\|\.split(" . --include="*.js" --include="*.ts"
grep -rn "/[^/]*[+*][^/]*[+*][^/]*/" . --include="*.js" --include="*.ts"

# Python
grep -rn "re\.compile\|re\.match\|re\.search\|re\.findall\|re\.sub" . --include="*.py"
grep -rn "re\.DOTALL\|re\.MULTILINE\|re\.VERBOSE" . --include="*.py"

# Ruby
grep -rn "Regexp\.new\|=~\|\.match\|\.scan\|\.gsub" . --include="*.rb"

# PHP
grep -rn "preg_match\|preg_replace\|preg_split" . --include="*.php"

# Java
grep -rn "Pattern\.compile\|\.matches(\|\.replaceAll(" . --include="*.java"

Step 2: Identify Potentially Vulnerable Patterns

Look for these red flags:

  1. Nested quantifiers: (X+)+, (X*)*, (X+)*, (X*)+
  2. Overlapping alternation: (a|a)+, (a|ab)+
  3. Quantified group with internal repetition: (\s*,\s*)+
  4. Unbounded repetition with anchor failure: Pattern ends with $ and input doesn't match
  5. User-controlled regex: new RegExp(userInput) -- always exploitable

Step 3: Mandatory Timing Measurement

// Node.js timing test -- REQUIRED before reporting
const regex = /VULNERABLE_PATTERN/;

console.log('Length | Time (ms) | Ratio');
let prevTime = 0;
for (let len = 15; len <= 35; len++) {
  const evil = 'a'.repeat(len) + '!';
  const start = performance.now();
  regex.test(evil);
  const elapsed = performance.now() - start;
  const ratio = prevTime > 0 ? (elapsed / prevTime).toFixed(1) : '-';
  console.log(`${String(len).padStart(6)} | ${elapsed.toFixed(2).padStart(9)} | ${ratio}`);
  prevTime = elapsed;
}

Interpretation:

  • Ratio ~2.0 per character = exponential (O(2^N)) = CONFIRMED ReDoS
  • Ratio ~1.0 but time grows = likely polynomial = needs larger input test
  • Ratio ~1.0 and time flat = linear = NOT ReDoS

Step 4: Classify Severity

Growth RateRatio PatternInput for 1s HangSeverity
O(2^N) exponential~2x per char25-30 charsHIGH 7.5
O(N^3+) polynomialgrows with input10K-100K charsMEDIUM 5.3-6.5
O(N^2) quadraticgrows slowly100K+ charsLOW-MEDIUM
O(N) linearconstant rationeverNOT ReDoS

Step 5: Verify User Input Reaches Regex

The regex MUST be applied to user-controlled input. Check the full call chain:

  1. Where does input enter? (HTTP param, form field, file content)
  2. Is input truncated before regex? (length limit < 100 chars = likely safe)
  3. Is there a regex timeout? (some libraries implement circuit breakers)
  4. Is the regex applied in a worker/child process? (reduces impact to DoS of worker only)

Language-Specific Notes

JavaScript (V8 Engine)

  • No built-in regex timeout. Catastrophic backtracking freezes the entire event loop.
  • Single-threaded: one ReDoS hangs ALL request processing.
  • String.prototype.matchAll() is lazy but still backtracks.
  • V8 does NOT use RE2 for regex. All JS regex uses backtracking.

Python

  • GIL blocks all threads. ReDoS in one thread freezes the entire process.
  • re module uses backtracking. No built-in timeout.
  • re2 package (Google RE2 bindings) is safe but rarely used.
  • Python 3.11+ has some regex optimizations but is still vulnerable.

Go

  • Uses RE2 engine. Guarantees linear-time matching. NOT vulnerable to ReDoS.
  • Exception: CGo bindings to PCRE (rare) ARE vulnerable.
  • Skip Go targets unless they use PCRE bindings.

Ruby

  • Uses Oniguruma engine (backtracking). Vulnerable to ReDoS.
  • Ruby 3.2+ added Regexp.timeout= global setting -- check if configured.
  • Regexp.timeout defaults to nil (no timeout) unless explicitly set.

PHP

  • Uses PCRE (backtracking). Vulnerable to ReDoS.
  • pcre.backtrack_limit defaults to 1,000,000 -- provides some protection.
  • Check ini_get('pcre.backtrack_limit') -- if lowered, may limit impact.

Java

  • Uses backtracking engine. Vulnerable to ReDoS.
  • No built-in timeout in Pattern.compile().
  • Can be mitigated with Thread.interrupt() but rarely done.

CVSS Guidance

  • Exponential backtracking, user input, event loop blocking: HIGH 7.5
  • Exponential backtracking, authenticated only: MEDIUM 6.5
  • Quadratic on user input requiring large payload (>10KB): MEDIUM 5.3
  • Regex on bounded input (< 100 chars): usually not exploitable
  • Regex with timeout/circuit breaker configured: reduced severity
  • User-controlled regex pattern (new RegExp(input)): HIGH 7.5 (always exploitable)

References

  • Sinks -- Regex-heavy libraries and known vulnerable patterns
  • False Positive Indicators
  • PoC Skeleton

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.