CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-46350NVD status: Deferred

dcmjs is a JavaScript implementation of DICOM manipulation.

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-46350 is a critical-severity improper input validation vulnerability in dcmjs from Dcmjs-org, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.1 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected dcmjs versions: < 0.52.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.6% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Patch this week

Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.

What to do

  1. Check which version of dcmjs you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Dcmjs-orgdcmjs< 0.52.0Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
NoneNo data is disclosed.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official description

dcmjs is a JavaScript implementation of DICOM manipulation. Prior to 0.52.0, the DecimalString and IntegerString implementations in src/ValueRepresentation.js sanitize text with a permissive regular expression and pass the result to JavaScript's Number constructor without validating finiteness or the DICOM value-representation rules. Scientific notation overflow in a DS or IS field can produce positive or negative Infinity, while stripping alphabetic characters from signed infinity text can leave a sign-only string that converts to NaN. IntegerString also accepts exponent notation and values outside the DICOM signed 32-bit IS range. Applications that trust these parsed values can propagate invalid numbers into spatial geometry, display windowing, dose scaling, frame counts, rescaling, or volume reconstruction, causing incorrect calculations or disrupted processing. This issue is fixed in version 0.52.0.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
  • Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
  • Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

More Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-20)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.