Tell HN: Camelgate NPM Outage (Cloudflare)

117 points by bavarianbob 2 days ago

EDIT: Back online?!

NPM discussion: https://github.com/npm/cli/issues/8203

NPM incident: https://status.npmjs.org/incidents/hdtkrsqp134s

Cloudflare messaging: https://www.cloudflarestatus.com/incidents/gshczn1wxh74

GitHub issue: https://github.com/sindresorhus/camelcase/issues/114

Anyone experiencing npm outage that's more than just the referenced camelcase package?

Seems to be a change in Cloudflare's managed WAF ruleset - any site using that will have URLs containing 'camel' blocked due to the 'Apache Camel - Remote Code Execution - CVE:CVE-2025-29891' (a9ec9cf625ff42769298671d1bbcd247) rule.

That rule can be overridden if you're having this issue on your own site.

internetter - a day ago

> any site using that will have URLs containing 'camel' blocked
What engineer at cloudflare thought this was a good resolution?
- Raed667 - a day ago
  
  I doubt the system is that simple. No one wrote a rule saying `if url.contains("camel") then block()` it's probably an unintended side-effect
  - keithwhor - a day ago
    
    If this is a bet, I'll happily take the other side and give you 4:1 on it.
    
    dgfitz - a day ago
    
    Me too.
  - ycombinatrix - a day ago
    
    Akamai has been doing precisely that for years & years...
    
    - a day ago
    
    [deleted]
    
    benoau - a day ago
    
    I think you can include advertising/privacy block lists in that vein too, although that allows for the users to locally-correct any issues.
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn - 12 hours ago
    
    Judging by previous outages it was probably a poorly tested overcomplicated regex which matched to much.
- TacticalCoder - a day ago
  
  [dead]
cbovis - a day ago

Confirmed here: https://www.cloudflarestatus.com/incidents/gshczn1wxh74
oncallthrow - a day ago

WAFs are so shit
- ronsor - a day ago
  
  WAFs are literally "a pile of regexes can secure my insecure software"
  - mschuster91 - a day ago
    
    To be fair to WAFs, most are more than just a pile of regexes. Things like detecting bot traffic - be it spammers or AI scrapers - are valuable (ESPECIALLY the AI scraper detection, because unlike search engines these things have zero context recognition or respect for robots.txt and will just happily go on and ingest very heavy endpoints), and the large CDN/WAF providers can do it even better because they can spot shit like automated port scanners, Metasploit or similar skiddie tooling across all the services that use them.
    Honestly what I'd _love_ to see is AWS, GCE, Azure, Fastly, Cloudflare and Akamai band together and share information about such bad actors, compile evidence lists and file abuse reports against their ISP - or in case the ISP is a "bulletproof hoster" or certain enemy states, initiate enforcement actors like governments to get these bad ISPs disconnected from the Internet.
    
    randunel - a day ago
    
    Why would scrapes get blocked, is scrapping illegal?
    
    Xylakant - a day ago
    
    It's very often not, but it's still the website owners property and if they choose so, they can show misbehaving guests the door and kindly ask to remain on the other side (aka block them). Large scale scraping puts substantial burden on web properties. I was paged the other night because someone decided it would be a great idea to throw 200 000rq/s for a few minutes at some publicly available volunteer run service.
    
    eitland - a day ago
    
    I don't know if it is, but I also don't think we are required to let dumb bots repeatedly assault or web sites if we can find a technical way to get around it.
  - cluckindan - 18 hours ago
    
    They do mitigate known vulnerabilities.
- UltraSane - a day ago
  
  But are they less shit than the shitty software they filter traffic for?

Recursing - 2 days ago

Any path with the word "camel" seem to trigger this: https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=camel | https://registry.npmjs.org/camel123 | https://registry.yarnpkg.com/camel456

Some discussion here https://github.com/npm/cli/issues/8203

Edit: this is resolved now https://status.npmjs.org/incidents/hdtkrsqp134s

pvg - a day ago

This is not CF WAF's first rodeo https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20421538

Cementing its track record as a product that mostly doesn't do anything except for occasionally break the internet here and there to keep things fun and interesting.

lynnesbian - a day ago

> a product that mostly doesn't do anything except for occasionally break the internet
I wouldn't say that. The postmortem you referred to links to another CloudFlare blog post - one about a pretty serious RCE vuln in Microsoft SharePoint that was blocked by their WAF: https://blog.cloudflare.com/stopping-cve-2019-0604/
- pvg - a day ago
  
  I mean, it's hardly surprising CloudFlare will tell you this is a useful product. But it is to securing a web application what regex is to parsing HTML.
  - jiggawatts - 21 hours ago
    
    Sadly I work with web developers that all assume they don’t need to bother too much with security “because we have a WAF”.
AdamJacobMuller - a day ago

I'm not sure why "WAF has false positives" makes it useless, nor would I say this is anywhere near the scale of "breaking the internet" and I'm not even fan of the concept of WAFs in general.
- pvg - a day ago
  
  The last one took out a lot more stuff than this one but the argument is the same - this product is a checkmark thing and when it's not fulfilling its checkmark purpose, it causes outages. Still an amusing bi-modality! I suppose it shares it with DNSSEC.
  - misiek08 - a day ago
    
    Basically CF default WAF settings saved more small and medium companies I can even count to. I’m not CF fan, but WAFs (with rate limiting) do help. Sad that one or two incidents for that complicated and big services make people post such comments, but cmon - it doesn’t have AI in it's name so sheeps have to cry, right?
calvinmorrison - a day ago

we've used it to rescue some vintage appliances that are basically unsecurable.