EEF-CVE-2026-81316 CVE-2026-81316 GHSA-v7pf-wjxc-7j5m
Same-named aggregates with differing filters are conflated in AshSql
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Unknown · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.17%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 6.42% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
- Fix
0.7.1- Upgrade ash_sql to this version or later
Description
Summary
Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to receive an aggregate value computed over rows a more restrictive filter should have excluded, disclosing counts, sums, or lists across an authorization or tenancy boundary.
AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?/2 reports two aggregate queries as different only when their filter and their sort both differ. Aggregate queries rarely carry a sort, so two aggregates that share a name but carry entirely different filters compare as identical. The colliding aggregate keeps its name and is treated as already computed, and select_aggregates returns the first-registered variant's value. The same name reaches the builder twice with different filters when actor or tenant context is stamped into each aggregate's query, so a narrowly filtered aggregate can be served the value of a previously registered broad one.
This issue affects ash_sql: from 0.1.0 before 0.7.1.
Configurations
An application must compute an aggregate whose name also reaches the query builder under a second, differently filtered context (for example the same aggregate used both as a filter dependency and loaded, where actor or tenant scoping stamps distinct filters onto each).
Affected versions
Hex
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| ash_sql | >= 0.1.0, < 0.7.1 |
0.7.1 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
ash_sql Hex → 0.7.1
- mix
{:ash_sql, "~> 0.7.1"} # then: mix deps.update ash_sql
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
Weakness
CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Fixes and patches
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| EEF-CVE-2026-77454 exists/2 predicate silently dropped on limited relationships with a parent() filter in AshSql | Not rated yet | Also affects ash_sql |
| EEF-CVE-2026-81318 Distinct-query aggregate drops the tenant schema prefix, leaking across tenants in AshSql | Not rated yet | Also affects ash_sql |
| EEF-CVE-2026-78691 Unescaped backslash allows LIKE wildcard injection in AshSql string search | Not rated yet | Also affects ash_sql |
| EEF-CVE-2026-80227 SQL string_trim removes only spaces, diverging from in-memory trimming in AshSql | Not rated yet | Also affects ash_sql |
| GHSA-9v7c-q64q-vv33 Nuxt: Dot segments in the request path bypass `server/middleware` path checks and server route rules on page routes | Medium | Same weakness, CWE-863 |
| EEF-CVE-2026-115627 AshPostgres ignores attribute multitenancy on the join resource when loading many_to_many and through relationships, returning records related through other tenants' rows | Not rated yet | Same weakness, CWE-863 |
| EEF-CVE-2026-115635 AshPostgres returns another tenant's record for a skipped upsert when return_skipped_upsert? is set | Not rated yet | Same weakness, CWE-863 |
| EEF-CVE-2026-114214 Loading a through relationship with a limit of 1 in Ash ignores the through path and returns unrelated destination records | Not rated yet | Same weakness, CWE-863 |
Credits: Jonatan Männchen / EEF, Peter Ullrich, Zach Daniel / Ash Project
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor