GHSA-p5w8-m249-4r4v CVE-2026-69262
Flowise: `DELETE /api/v1/chatflows/:id` does not validate resource type, allowing `agentflows:delete` and `chatflows:delete` to delete each other’s flow type
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.52%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 44.50% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
- Fix
3.1.3- Upgrade flowise to this version or later
Description
summary:
In Flowise, DELETE /api/v1/chatflows/:id authorizes requests with checkAnyPermission('chatflows:delete,agentflows:delete'). Possession of either permission is sufficient to reach the delete path. The delete logic does not validate the target resource type, allowing a caller with only agentflows:delete to delete a CHATFLOW, and a caller with only chatflows:delete to delete an AGENTFLOW.
details:
The delete route accepts either chatflows:delete or agentflows:delete. The subsequent logic only resolves the target record by id and workspaceId, then deletes by id without checking whether the target resource type matches the granted permission domain.
As a result, there is no binding between permission scope and flow type:
agentflows:deletecan be used to deleteCHATFLOWchatflows:deletecan be used to deleteAGENTFLOW
This breaks the intended RBAC separation between Chatflows and Agentflows.
impact:
Users authorized to manage only one flow type can delete the other flow type within the same workspace, resulting in unauthorized deletion and configuration loss.
reproduction steps:
- Log in as a user who can create API keys.
- Create a normal
CHATFLOWand record itsid. - Create an API key with only
agentflows:delete. - Use that API key to send:
curl -i -X DELETE \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <agentflows_delete_only_key>' \
http://localhost:8080/api/v1/chatflows/<chatflow_id>
- Observe a
200 OKresponse, for example:
{"raw":[],"affected":1}
- Read the same
idagain and observe404 Not Found.
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:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- None
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- High
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
CVSS 3.1 8.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
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
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| 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 |
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