GHSA-chm3-vqcf-52rx CVE-2026-70472

Flowise: Cross-workspace credential IDOR in openai-assistants-vector-store

High npm

Severity: 0.0 / 10; High · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS): 0.52%; Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 43.89% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited: No; Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness: CWE-285 Improper Authorization; CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix: 3.1.3; Upgrade flowise to this version or later

Description

Summary

These endpoints accept a client-controlled credential parameter. The server loads credentials by id and uses them directly, without checking whether that credential belongs to the caller’s workspace. If an attacker knows another workspace’s credentialId, they can use that workspace’s OpenAI key.

Details

Route permissions (assistants:*) only check feature access. They do not check credential ownership. The controller passes req.query.credential straight to the service. The service does findOneBy({ id: credentialId }), decrypts the credential, and calls OpenAI APIs. There is no workspaceId check in this flow, so this is an IDOR.

Impact

Cross-workspace unauthorized use of stored OpenAI keys.
Unauthorized read/modify/delete of victim vector stores and files.
Direct billing impact on victim OpenAI account.
Multi-tenant boundary violation with practical exploitability.

Reproduction steps

Set up two workspaces: A (attacker) and B (victim), each with an OpenAI credential.
Log in as a user in workspace A (with assistants-related permissions).
Call /api/v1/openai-assistants-vector-store and set credential to B’s credential ID.
Example: GET /api/v1/openai-assistants-vector-store?credential=<B_credentialId>.
If responses/actions are executed using B’s credential context, the issue is confirmed.

Affected versions

npm

Package	Vulnerable	Fixed in
flowise	`< 3.1.3`	`3.1.3`

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.

flowise npm → `3.1.3`

npm

npm install flowise@3.1.3

yarn

yarn add flowise@3.1.3

pnpm

pnpm add flowise@3.1.3

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

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

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

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-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.

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

Packages

github.com/FlowiseAI/Flowise

Timeline

Aug 4, 2026 Published
Oct 24, 2026 Last updated by the source
Nov 1, 2026 Latest EPSS score

Advisory	Severity	Why it's related
GHSA-w7x8-q2gp-5cgg Flowise Prompt Injection to RCE and SSRF via CSV/Airtable Agent Python Validator Bypass	Critical	Also affects flowise
GHSA-9gvv-qjj3-2p6g Flowise NodeVM sandbox escape via puppeteer allowlist - authenticated RCE and arbitrary file read via Chromium	High	Also affects flowise
GHSA-qgvm-j2hm-6m38 Flowise: Unauthenticated OAuth2 token refresh endpoint returns access tokens — enables token theft for any connected service	Critical	Also affects flowise
GHSA-5xvg-pmgg-3mxr Flowise: CSV Agent Prompt Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability	Critical	Also affects flowise
GHSA-gmmw-qg98-6j6p Flowise: Broken Access Control in Stripe Subscription Endpoints Allows Cross-Tenant Billing Manipulation	High	Also affects flowise
GHSA-8gj2-2cvc-6xx7 Flowise: Unauthenticated Credential Abuse via Text-to-Speech Endpoint Allows Unauthorized Use of Private Chatflow TTS Credentials	Medium	Also affects flowise
GHSA-fm2f-4339-4p2f Flowise: Missing Authorization on Execution Update Endpoint	Medium	Also affects flowise
GHSA-wch5-xp77-fxg4 Flowise: Cross-Workspace OAuth2 Credential Metadata Leak	High	Also affects flowise

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