Skip to content

Security Vulnerabilities in "uuid" & "fast-xml-parser" transitive dependencies for @google-cloud/storage latest version 7.19.0 #8134

Open

Description

@max-chen-innosys

Please make sure you have searched for information in the following guides.

Library Name

@google-cloud/storage

A screenshot that you have tested with "Try this API".

Not applicable to this bug

Link to the code that reproduces this issue. A link to a public Github Repository or gist with a minimal reproduction.

https://github.com/googleapis/google-cloud-node

A step-by-step description of how to reproduce the issue, based on the linked reproduction.

There are security vulnerabilities in the "uuid" and "fast-xml-parser" transitive dependencies used by @google-cloud/storage v7.19.0 which we discovered when running the "npm audit" command in node.js

Please refer to these links for reference:

GHSA-gh4j-gqv2-49f6
GHSA-w5hq-g745-h8pq
Running "npm ls fast-xml-parser" shows this:
└─┬ @google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
└── fast-xml-parser@5.6.0

Running "npm ls uuid" shows this:
@google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
├─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ google-auth-library@9.15.1
│ └─┬ gtoken@7.1.0
│ └─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ teeny-request@9.0.0
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
└── uuid@8.3.2

Please advise if there are any plans to fix this vulnerability in @google-cloud/storage, or how we can handle it.

Thank you.

A clear and concise description of what the bug is, and what you expected to happen.

There are security vulnerabilities in the "uuid" and "fast-xml-parser" transitive dependencies used by @google-cloud/storage v7.19.0 which we discovered when running the "npm audit" command in node.js

Please refer to these links for reference:

GHSA-gh4j-gqv2-49f6
GHSA-w5hq-g745-h8pq
Running "npm ls fast-xml-parser" shows this:
└─┬ @google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
└── fast-xml-parser@5.6.0

Running "npm ls uuid" shows this:
@google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
├─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ google-auth-library@9.15.1
│ └─┬ gtoken@7.1.0
│ └─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ teeny-request@9.0.0
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
└── uuid@8.3.2

Please advise if there are any plans to fix this vulnerability in @google-cloud/storage, or how we can handle it.

Thank you.

A clear and concise description WHY you expect this behavior, i.e., was it a recent change, there is documentation that points to this behavior, etc. **

There are security vulnerabilities in the "uuid" and "fast-xml-parser" transitive dependencies used by @google-cloud/storage v7.19.0 which we discovered when running the "npm audit" command in node.js

Please refer to these links for reference:

GHSA-gh4j-gqv2-49f6
GHSA-w5hq-g745-h8pq
Running "npm ls fast-xml-parser" shows this:
└─┬ @google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
└── fast-xml-parser@5.6.0

Running "npm ls uuid" shows this:
@google-cloud/storage@7.19.0
├─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ google-auth-library@9.15.1
│ └─┬ gtoken@7.1.0
│ └─┬ gaxios@6.7.1
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
├─┬ teeny-request@9.0.0
│ └── uuid@9.0.1
└── uuid@8.3.2

Please advise if there are any plans to fix this vulnerability in @google-cloud/storage, or how we can handle it.

Thank you.

Activity

  1. meltsufin commented on May 5, 2026

    @meltsufin
    Contributor
  2. mhassan1 commented on May 5, 2026

    @mhassan1
    Contributor

    I've put up a PR to remove the uuid dependency (link).

  3. meltsufin commented on May 6, 2026

    @meltsufin
    Contributor

    I believe we can just update to version 11.1.1 which has been patched. There's no need to remove the dependency on uuid.

  4. orien commented on May 12, 2026

    @orien

    To resolve the security issue on uuid, we'll need to do the following (and perhaps more).

  5. habeeb-mir commented on Jul 9, 2026

    @habeeb-mir

    Hi, has there been any update on this?
    @shivanee-p @aabmass @pearigee @danieljbruce

  6. balintsoos commented on Aug 13, 2026

    @balintsoos

    Hi, we are currently working around this issue by pinning uuid via a dependency override on our end for @google-cloud/storage. Do you have a rough estimate for when a proper fix will ship so we can plan when to remove the override? Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions