GHSA-9j65-rv5x-4vrf BIT-grafana-2025-3454 CVE-2025-3454 GO-2025-3742
Grafana's datasource proxy API allows authorization checks to be bypassed
- Severity
- 5.0 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.46%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 39.78% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-285 Improper Authorization
- Fix
0.0.0-20250424191517-1f707d16ed5d- Upgrade github.com/grafana/grafana to this version or later
Description
This vulnerability in Grafana's datasource proxy API allows authorization checks to be bypassed by adding an extra slash character in the URL path.
Users with minimal permissions could gain unauthorized read access to GET endpoints in Alertmanager and Prometheus datasources.
The issue primarily affects datasources that implement route-specific permissions, including Alertmanager and certain Prometheus-based datasources.
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/grafana/grafana | >= 0.0.0-20210414170620-dadccdda06e6, < 0.0.0-20250424191517-1f707d16ed5d |
0.0.0-20250424191517-1f707d16ed5d |
| github.com/grafana/grafana | >= 0.0.0-20210414170620-dadccdda06e6 |
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 → 0.0.0-20250424191517-1f707d16ed5d
- go
go get github.com/grafana/grafana@v0.0.0-20250424191517-1f707d16ed5d && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 5.0
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- 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
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why 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 |
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