Skip to content

GHSA-9g87-32v6-3c2r CVE-2026-105805

Payload: Sort queries could expose protected field information

Medium npm
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.28%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 20.12% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
3.88.0
Upgrade payload to this version or later

Description

Impact

Under certain conditions, sorting readable records could reveal limited information about fields the requester was not permitted to read.

You are affected if untrusted users can query a collection, control its sorting, and sort by protected fields.

Patches

Payload now applies field-level access checks to sort fields before executing queries.

Users should upgrade to >= 3.88.0 or >= 4.0.0-canary.27.

Workarounds

Upgrading is recommended. Until then, prevent untrusted users from controlling sort parameters or restrict their access to affected collections.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
payload
< 3.88.0
3.88.0
payload
>= 4.0.0-canary.0, < 4.0.0-canary.27
4.0.0-canary.27

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.

payload npm → 3.88.0

npm
npm install payload@3.88.0
yarn
yarn add payload@3.88.0
pnpm
pnpm add payload@3.88.0

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
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-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

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

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-9qpg-3cf8-w33x
Payload: Uploaded XML files could execute same-origin JavaScript
High Also affects payload
GHSA-v5gf-vpjc-pc7w
Payload: Unauthenticated account-lockout denial of service
High Also affects payload
GHSA-p223-2wr2-j562
Payload: Incomplete validation during the upload file lifecycle
High Also affects payload
GHSA-66wr-7vmr-p5jq
Payload authentication token field handling issue
Critical Also affects payload
GHSA-2pwp-2369-8fg3
Payload: Bypassed sanitization of user uploaded SVGs
High Also affects payload
GHSA-pj5h-5q6c-3pfx
Payload external upload trust validation issue
High Also affects payload
GHSA-f7hx-52q9-hcrf
Payload: Unauthorized update to collection documents
Critical Also affects payload
GHSA-97rh-rhh2-7vjv
Payload: Remote Code Execution through first-register
High Also affects payload
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