This Christmas, React Universe On Air takes a different path. No guests, demos, or framework updates. Not even a wrap-up of 2025 or 2026 trends. Instead, Ola Desmurs-Linczewska tells a story: one set in the glow of a late‑night terminal, haunted by audit warnings, broken trust, and the ghosts of dependencies past, present, and future.

A (Secure) Christmas Carol is a fairytale for modern JavaScript developers. It follows a senior engineer who never misses a deadline, rarely reads an audit report, and believes every red warning can be ignored “just this once.” On Christmas Eve, that belief is tested.

If you’ve ever scrolled past a vulnerability warning, postponed a dependency upgrade until “after the release,” or told a teammate you’d revisit security later, this episode will feel uncomfortably familiar 👻

Meet Npmezer Scrooge

Npmezer Scrooge works through Christmas while the rest of the world signs off. As the night unfolds, he’s visited by three spirits who reveal the hidden cost of neglected dependencies: trust eroded, families interrupted, and an ecosystem pushed to the brink.

The story moves between past optimism, present‑day incidents, and a chilling possible future, without ever naming the ending. What matters isn’t how the night ends, but what it asks every listener: What are we quietly shipping today that someone else will have to pay for tomorrow?

Security breaches referenced in the story

Below is a non‑exhaustive list of real‑world security issues: some are explicitly shown in the story, others are closely related risks and consequences that the episode is intentionally warning about. Each is included here with context on why it matters.

ua-parser-js supply‑chain compromise (2021)

In October 2021, attackers gained control of the maintainer’s npm account for ua-parser-js, a widely used library for parsing browser user‑agent strings. Malicious versions 0.7.29, 0.8.0, and 1.0.0 were published to the npm registry and remained available for several hours.

When installed, these versions executed pre‑install scripts that downloaded external payloads, including cryptominers and credential‑stealing malware. Because ua-parser-js is a deep transitive dependency for many projects, the blast radius extended far beyond direct users.

This incident is a canonical example of a JavaScript supply‑chain attack, where trust in the ecosystem itself becomes the vulnerability.

react-quill / Quill stored XSS vulnerability

The rich‑text editor Quill, which underpins react‑quill, was affected by documented stored cross‑site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in versions ≤ 1.3.7. These issues stemmed from insufficient sanitization of certain HTML attributes in user‑supplied content.

Applications using react‑quill could unknowingly store malicious HTML that executed later in other users’ browsers, especially when rendered directly without additional sanitization. In the story, this risk is reflected in a large‑scale incident involving injected UI and phishing content.

No upstream patch fully resolved the issue at the time, leaving many teams to mitigate through sanitization layers, CSPs, or migration to alternative editors.

lodash versions prior to 4.17.21

Older versions of lodash contained multiple high‑impact vulnerabilities, including prototype pollution, regular‑expression denial of service (ReDoS), and a command‑injection flaw in _.template (CVE‑2021‑23337).

Because lodash is one of the most common transitive dependencies in JavaScript projects, vulnerable versions persisted in production systems for years after fixes were available.

express vulnerabilities (Pre‑4.19 / Pre‑4.20)

Several security issues affected Express versions prior to recent 4.19.x and 4.20.x releases, centered around redirect handling and improper neutralization of untrusted input.

One issue, CVE‑2024‑29041, was an open redirect flaw in res.location() and res.redirect(). Crafted URLs could bypass redirect allow‑lists, allowing attackers to redirect users to arbitrary external domains when user‑controlled input was used in redirect logic. While not a direct code‑execution bug, open redirects are frequently abused in phishing flows and login‑spoofing chains.

A second issue, CVE‑2024‑43796, affected Express versions prior to 4.20.0. In this case, res.redirect() could allow improper neutralization of untrusted input, meaning attackers could trigger execution of unwanted content even after sanitation attempts, effectively creating a cross‑site scripting (XSS) risk depending on how applications constructed redirects.

Individually, these flaws may appear subtle. In practice, they illustrate how widely used framework helpers can become leverage points for social‑engineering and XSS attacks, especially when combined with implicit trust in framework defaults.

Ignored audit warnings and unpinned dependencies

Throughout the story, ignored npm audit warnings and unpinned dependency ranges (^) act as recurring motifs. These practices don’t introduce vulnerabilities by themselves, but they dramatically increase exposure to known issues, especially when combined with long‑lived lockfiles and delayed upgrades.

They represent a pattern more than a single flaw: choosing speed today while silently accumulating risk for someone else to absorb later.

Hijacked popular packages

Beyond specific historical incidents, the story also reflects a recurring pattern in the JavaScript ecosystem: small, widely used packages being hijacked and republished with malicious code. In the episode, this appears as a popular icon package taken over just before the holidays, forcing an entire team to respond overnight.

These attacks succeed not because of complex exploits, but because trust is implicit, updates are routine, and downstream consumers rarely expect widely used utilities to turn hostile without warning.

Transitive dependency explosion

Early in the story, a single npm install pulls in hundreds of packages; many of them entirely unknown to the developer running the command. This reflects the reality of modern JavaScript projects, where applications often depend on deep and opaque dependency trees.

The risk is not just the number of packages, but the distance between cause and effect: vulnerabilities introduced several layers down can surface far away from the code that triggered them, long after the original decision was made.

‍

A (Secure) Christmas Carol is a holiday story, but the risks it describes aren’t seasonal. Let it run start to finish, and then, maybe, open your own package.json with fresh eyes.