chore(deps): bump node-forge from 1.3.3 to 1.4.0

[dependabot]

Bumps node-forge from 1.3.3 to 1.4.0.

Changelog

Sourced from node-forge's changelog.

1.4.0 - 2026-03-24

Security

• HIGH: Denial of Service in BigInteger.modInverse()
  • A Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability exists due to an infinite loop in the BigInteger.modInverse() function (inherited from the bundled jsbn library). When modInverse() is called with a zero value as input, the internal Extended Euclidean Algorithm enters an unreachable exit condition, causing the process to hang indefinitely and consume 100% CPU.
  • Reported by Kr0emer.
  • CVE ID: CVE-2026-33891
  • GHSA ID: GHSA-5gfm-wpxj-wjgq
• HIGH: Signature forgery in RSA-PKCS due to ASN.1 extra field.
  • RSASSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification accepts forged signatures for low public exponent keys (e=3). Attackers can forge signatures by stuffing "garbage" bytes within the ASN.1 structure in order to construct a signature that passes verification, enabling Bleichenbacher style forgery. This issue is similar to CVE-2022-24771, but adds bytes in an addition field within the ASN.1 structure, rather than outside of it.
  • Additionally, forge does not validate that signatures include a minimum of 8 bytes of padding as defined by the specification, providing attackers additional space to construct Bleichenbacher forgeries.
  • Reported as part of a U.C. Berkeley security research project by:
    • Austin Chu, Sohee Kim, and Corban Villa.
  • CVE ID: CVE-2026-33894
  • GHSA ID: GHSA-ppp5-5v6c-4jwp
• HIGH: Signature forgery in Ed25519 due to missing S < L check.
  • Ed25519 signature verification accepts forged non-canonical signatures where the scalar S is not reduced modulo the group order (S >= L). A valid signature and its S + L variant both verify in forge, while Node.js crypto.verify (OpenSSL-backed) rejects the S + L variant, as defined by the specification. This class of signature malleability has been exploited in practice to bypass authentication and authorization logic (see CVE-2026-25793, CVE-2022-35961). Applications relying on signature uniqueness (i.e., dedup by signature bytes, replay tracking, signed-object canonicalization checks) may be bypassed.
  • Reported as part of a U.C. Berkeley security research project by:
    • Austin Chu, Sohee Kim, and Corban Villa.
  • CVE ID: CVE-2026-33895
  • GHSA ID: GHSA-q67f-28xg-22rw
• HIGH: basicConstraints bypass in certificate chain verification.
  • pki.verifyCertificateChain() does not enforce RFC 5280 basicConstraints requirements when an intermediate certificate lacks both the basicConstraints and keyUsage extensions. This allows any leaf certificate (without these extensions) to act as a CA and sign other certificates, which node-forge will accept as valid.
  • Reported by Doruk Tan Ozturk (@​peaktwilight) - doruk.ch
  • CVE ID: CVE-2026-33896
  • GHSA ID: GHSA-2328-f5f3-gj25

... (truncated)

Commits

• fa385f9 Release 1.4.0.
• 07d4e16 Update changelog.
• cb90fd9 Update changelog.
• 963e7c5 Add unit test for "pseudonym"
• f0b6f5b Add pseudonym OID
• 3df48a3 Fix missing CVE ID.
• 2e49283 Add x509 basicConstraints check.
• bdecf11 Add canonical signature scaler check for S < L.
• af094e6 Add RSA padding and DigestInfo length checks.
• 796eeb1 Improve jsbn fix.
• Additional commits viewable in compare view

Note
Automatic rebases have been disabled on this pull request as it has been open for over 30 days.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.70%. Comparing base (d22274f) to head (e8801f6).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #736   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.70%   62.70%           
=======================================
  Files          64       64           
  Lines        1035     1035           
  Branches      378      372    -6     
=======================================
  Hits          649      649           
- Misses        379      386    +7     
+ Partials        7        0    -7     

Flag	Coverage Δ
combined	62.70% <ø> (?)
cypress	72.91% <ø> (?)
jest	37.10% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.