← Back to all briefings
Developer 6 min read Published Updated Credibility 40/100

Node.js End-of-Life: Upgrade Strategy for Secure and Supported Deployments

Node.js versions 12, 14, 16 and 18 have reached end-of-life, meaning they no longer receive security updates. This brief explains the Node.js release cycle, upcoming EOL dates, risks of running unsupported versions and provides guidance on migrating to supported LTS releases such as Node.js 20 and 24.

Zeph Tech Research Lead

Research lead, Zeph Tech

Single-point timeline showing the publication date sized by credibility score.
Publication date and credibility emphasis for this briefing. Source data (JSON)

Running unsupported runtime versions is a significant operational and security risk. The Node.js community follows a predictable release cadence: each major version enters Current status for six months, then odd‑numbered releases quickly become unsupported, while even‑numbered releases transition to Active Long‑Term Support (LTS) and receive critical bug fixes for roughly thirty months【129134205843719†L39-L46】. By 2025 the project has retired multiple versions—Node.js 12 reached end‑of‑life on 5 April 2022【592928374483413†L19-L23】, v16 on 8 August 2023, and v18 on 30 April 2025. Only Node.js 20 (maintenance LTS until 30 April 2026) and Node.js 24 (active LTS) remain supported【129134205843719†L60-L70】. When releases reach end‑of‑life they no longer receive security updates or bug fixes; using them can expose applications to unpatched vulnerabilities, break build pipelines, create ecosystem drift and generate compliance red flags【678214297022108†L47-L66】.

Key changes and upcoming milestones

The final update to the Node.js 12 line (v12.22.12) marked the end of support, meaning no further fixes or back‑ports【592928374483413†L19-L23】. Subsequent even‑numbered releases continue this pattern: Node.js 14 and 16 left support in 2023, while Node.js 18 exited maintenance LTS in April 2025. Organisations that plan long‑term platforms should note that Node.js 20 is scheduled to reach end‑of‑life in April 2026 and Node.js 22 enters maintenance LTS in late 2025【129134205843719†L60-L70】. Node.js 24, released in May 2025, is now the recommended active LTS line. Each new LTS release delivers modern JavaScript features, improved performance, built‑in fetch and WebStreams APIs, enhanced test runners and updated TLS defaults. Maintaining currency ensures compatibility with evolving ecosystems and reduces technical debt.

Implementation challenges and upgrade guidance

Migrating from an unsupported release requires careful planning. Differences in V8 engine versions, removed APIs and stricter default settings can break legacy code. Begin by inventorying all Node.js deployments and their dependent packages. Use version managers such as nvm or containerised development environments to test applications against the target LTS version. Check your dependencies for engine compatibility and update build scripts to use the new Node.js image tags. Many packages have dropped support for Node.js 12 and 14; upgrading dependencies before switching runtimes reduces cascading failures. Where native add‑ons are used, rebuild them against the new V8 toolchain. Continuous integration pipelines should be updated to use the new LTS image and to enforce static analysis and vulnerability scanning.

Implications and recommended actions

Continuing to run end‑of‑life Node.js releases exposes organisations to unpatched vulnerabilities and compliance issues【678214297022108†L47-L66】. Engineering leaders should establish a lifecycle management policy that mandates use of supported LTS versions and plans decommissioning before end‑of‑life dates. A suggested approach is:

  • Inventory and classify workloads: Identify all applications, functions and build jobs that depend on Node.js and note their current versions and criticality.
  • Choose a target LTS release: For most workloads, Node.js 20 or 24 will provide the longest runway. Evaluate whether any features in Node.js 22 are required.
  • Test and remediate: Use automated testing and static analysis to find breaking changes. Update deprecated APIs, refactor legacy code and modernise dependencies.
  • Update infrastructure: Refresh container base images, continuous integration runners, serverless runtimes and deployment manifests to the new Node.js version.
  • Document and train: Record migration steps, update developer guidelines and train engineers on new runtime features and deprecation patterns.

Zeph Tech analysis

The rapid retirement of Node.js versions underscores the need for proactive dependency management. Unsupported runtimes increase attack surface and impede innovation. By adopting a policy of staying on actively supported LTS releases, organisations can reduce risk, improve performance and align with software supply‑chain guidance such as NIST’s Secure Software Development Framework. Zeph Tech recommends integrating Node.js lifecycle tracking into configuration management databases and automating version checks in CI pipelines. The upcoming Node.js 20 and 24 LTS cycles provide an opportunity to modernise codebases, adopt ECMAScript modules and strengthen supply‑chain security.

Implementation timeline

Organizations should establish clear milestones for addressing the requirements introduced by this development. Key phases typically include:

  • Immediate (0-30 days): Conduct gap analysis comparing current capabilities against new requirements. Brief executive leadership and board members on obligations and potential compliance paths. Identify internal stakeholders who will own implementation workstreams.
  • Near-term (1-3 months): Update policies, procedures, and technical controls to align with new standards. Designate accountable roles and begin staff training. Engage external advisors where specialized expertise is required.
  • Medium-term (3-12 months): Complete implementation of required changes, conduct internal audits, and establish ongoing monitoring mechanisms. Document lessons learned and refine processes based on initial operational experience.
  • Long-term (12+ months): Integrate requirements into regular compliance cycles, update vendor contracts, and participate in industry working groups to track evolving interpretations. Plan for periodic reassessments as regulatory guidance matures.

Organizations with mature governance programs may accelerate these timelines by leveraging existing control frameworks and cross-functional teams. Those building capabilities from scratch should budget additional time for foundational work and stakeholder alignment.

Compliance considerations

Legal and compliance teams should assess how this development interacts with other regulatory obligations. Key areas to evaluate include:

  • Regulatory overlap: Identify where requirements overlap with existing frameworks (e.g., data protection laws, sector-specific regulations) and establish unified control implementations. Map common controls to reduce duplication and streamline audit evidence collection.
  • Documentation requirements: Determine what evidence will satisfy auditors and regulators. Develop templates for required documentation and establish retention policies. Implement version control and change management procedures for compliance artifacts.
  • Third-party assurance: Evaluate whether external certifications or attestations will strengthen compliance posture and facilitate customer trust. Consider industry-recognized frameworks that provide portable evidence across multiple regulatory contexts.
  • Cross-border implications: For multinational organizations, assess how requirements apply across different jurisdictions and whether harmonized or jurisdiction-specific approaches are necessary. Monitor regulatory cooperation agreements that may affect enforcement coordination.

Regular consultation with external counsel may be warranted as enforcement practices and regulatory guidance evolve. Organizations should establish clear escalation paths for novel compliance questions that arise during implementation.

  • Executive leadership: Board members and C-suite executives must understand strategic implications, resource requirements, and reputational considerations. They should ensure appropriate governance structures exist to oversee implementation and ongoing compliance. Executive sponsors should be designated to champion implementation efforts and resolve cross-functional conflicts.
  • Legal and compliance teams: These functions bear primary responsibility for interpreting requirements, mapping them to existing obligations, and advising business units on permissible activities. They should coordinate closely with external counsel on novel questions. Compliance teams should establish monitoring programs to track adherence and identify emerging issues before they escalate.
  • Technology teams: Engineering, architecture, and IT operations groups must assess technical feasibility, system changes, and integration requirements. They should plan for testing, deployment, and ongoing maintenance of compliance-related technical controls. Security teams should evaluate how changes affect the organization's security posture and threat landscape.
  • Business operations: Product managers, customer-facing teams, and operational units need to understand how requirements affect day-to-day activities, customer interactions, and service delivery. Training and process documentation should address their specific workflows. Change management programs should support smooth transitions without disrupting business continuity.
  • Third-party relationships: Procurement, vendor management, and partnership teams should evaluate how requirements flow down to suppliers, contractors, and business partners. Contract amendments and ongoing monitoring may be necessary. Due diligence processes should be enhanced to verify third-party compliance postures.

Effective implementation requires coordination across these stakeholder groups, with clear communication channels and escalation procedures for cross-functional issues. Regular status updates and governance checkpoints help maintain alignment and momentum throughout the implementation lifecycle.

Single-point timeline showing the publication date sized by credibility score.
Publication date and credibility emphasis for this briefing. Source data (JSON)

Related briefings

Curated signals from the same pillar or overlapping topics.

Continue in the Developer pillar

Return to the hub for curated research and deep-dive guides.

Visit pillar hub

Latest guides

  • software development
  • infrastructure
  • developer tooling
Back to curated briefings

Comments

Community

We publish only high-quality, respectful contributions. Every submission is reviewed for clarity, sourcing, and safety before it appears here.

    Share your perspective

    Submissions showing "Awaiting moderation" are in review. Spam, low-effort posts, or unverifiable claims will be rejected. We verify submissions with the email you provide, and we never publish or sell that address.

    Verification

    Complete the CAPTCHA to submit.