Skip to content

GHSA-7g92-g4vh-hp84 BIT-grafana-2026-21724 CVE-2026-21724 GO-2026-5219

Grafana OSS: Authorization bypass allows users with Editor role to modify protected webhook URLs without permissions

Medium Go
Severity
5.4 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.27%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 19.75% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-285 Improper Authorization
Fix
1.9.2-0.20260323180334-daffe750de85
Upgrade github.com/grafana/grafana to this version or later

Description

A vulnerability has been discovered in Grafana OSS where an authorization bypass in the provisioning contact points API allows users with Editor role to modify protected webhook URLs without the required alert.notifications.receivers.protected:write permission.

A patched version is available at https://github.com/grafana/grafana/releases/tag/v12.3.6.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/grafana/grafana
< 1.9.2-0.20260323180334-daffe750de85
1.9.2-0.20260323180334-daffe750de85
github.com/grafana/grafana
all versions
No fix yet

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.

github.com/grafana/grafana Go → 1.9.2-0.20260323180334-daffe750de85

go
go get github.com/grafana/grafana@v1.9.2-0.20260323180334-daffe750de85 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 5.4

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-285: Improper Authorization

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

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) 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 you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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.
  • 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

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-8pjx-jj86-j47p
Grafana path traversal
High Known exploited Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
CVE-2021-39226
Authentication bypass for viewing and deletions of snapshots
High Known exploited Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-3w66-95m3-8jxg
Grafana: Pre-authentication denial of service in the public dashboard query handler
High Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-9g84-39mm-q4p3
Grafana geomap panel's XYZ tile layer has a sanitize-then-interpolate ordering bug
Medium Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-f74p-cwhp-x2wx
Grafana Loki datasource plugin's callResource handler contains a path traversal vulnerability.
High Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-9493-h4f5-633x
Grafana: Path traversal in the Tempo and Loki data source plugins
Medium Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-wfhv-mj62-f5xh
Grafana: Users can generate Service Account tokens after permissions removal
High Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
GHSA-gxcp-jjxh-rwp4
Grafana: SQL Expressions Read File From Disk
Medium Also affects github.com/grafana/grafana
Is this in your code?

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