Skip to content

GHSA-c36x-h252-g9x2 BIT-openbao-2026-55774 CVE-2026-55774 GO-2026-5304

OpenBao: Cross-namespace lease revocation/renewal via canonical sys/leases/{revoke,renew} — incomplete fix of CVE-2026-45808

Low Go
Severity
0.0 / 10
Low · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.56%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 46.75% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404
Upgrade github.com/openbao/openbao to this version or later

Description

Summary

OpenBao users with access to the sys/leases/revoke/:lease_id endpoint in any namespace can revoke leases in any other namespace as long as the lease identifier is known to them, bypassing ACLs that should apply for cross-namespace revocations.

Impact

OpenBao's namespaces provide multi-tenant separation. A tenant who intentionally leaks lease identifiers can have their lease and underlying credential revoked by a user in another tenant.

Patch

This will be fixed in OpenBao v2.5.5.

References

This vulnerability is similar to but distinct from:

  • CVE-2026-45808 / GHSA-v8v8-cm84-m686
  • CVE-2026-40264 / GHSA-p49j-v9wc-wg57

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/openbao/openbao
>= 0.1.0, <= 2.5.4
No fix yet
github.com/openbao/openbao
< 0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404
0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404
github.com/openbao/openbao
< 0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404
>= 0.1.0
0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404

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/openbao/openbao Go → 0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404

go
go get github.com/openbao/openbao@v0.0.0-20260617103932-b20b999dd404 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

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

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
High
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
None
Availability (vulnerable system)
Low
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

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-xp3c-3jw3-4vcr
OpenBao Skips Stricter Deny Policy for LIST operations
Medium Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-34fc-gh42-pj53
OpenBao's Recovery Mode Vulnerable To Token Leakage via Timing Attack
Critical Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-444v-8vxr-p36h
OpenBao Agent Writes Secrets to Stdout
Low Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-59w7-v8rr-pr4p
OpenBao's Templated Policies Allow Privilege Escalation via Wildcard Characters
High Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-8w8f-r2xv-4q4j
OpenBao: Transit secrets engine crashes on key creation with `derived: true` for asymmetric key types
Medium Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-mwr2-wmgp-crj6
OpenBao's System Backend allows Unauthorized Management of the containing Namespace
Low Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-6mwx-4547-5vc9
OpenBao: LDAPi ldaputil (wrong escape func)
Medium Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
GHSA-7j6w-vvw2-5f9c
OpenBao's Kerberos Auth Method Accumulates Unaccessible Tokens
Medium Also affects github.com/openbao/openbao
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