RPC error handler fails open in AshTypescript, disclosing unredacted errors
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 25/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.54% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: ash-project ash_typescript 0.18.0, 59d8e985a98cf2e01794dbe5b919b897a95311f4.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to ash-project ash_typescript 0.18.0, 59d8e985a98cf2e01794dbe5b919b897a95311f4 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information vulnerability in ash-project ash_typescript allows an unauthenticated attacker to receive unredacted internal error data by provoking an error shape the configured error handler does not match. apply_error_handler/3 in lib/ash_typescript/rpc/errors.ex is the only hook an application has for redacting or suppressing errors before they reach the client, with a nil return dropping the error entirely. Its rescue clause logs a warning and then returns the original, pre-handler error map. Error handlers are conventionally written as pattern-matching functions over expected error shapes, so an unmatched shape raises FunctionClauseError and the raw transformed error, including any secrets carried in vars, is emitted instead. An intent to suppress an error becomes an intent to publish it. The rescue catches exceptions only, so a handler that throws or exits still propagates. This issue affects ash_typescript: from 0.8.0 before 0.18.0.
- Published
- Aug 31, 2026
- Updated
- Sep 1, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.5% · 44th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-209
Report tools
Action score
25
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 25 / 40 · 6.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.5%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · EEF
- 6.3
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (EEF). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
ash-project ash_typescript
- 0.8.0 and later · before 0.18.0affected · semver
- cb01cc8749e5a2a17fb45aedbe75df30a9f1126e and later · before 59d8e985a98cf2e01794dbe5b919b897a95311f4affected · git
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hex | ash_typescript | from 0.8.0 · before 0.18.0 | 0.18.0 |
Same product
ash-project: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-74837Unbounded atom creation from client-supplied RPC field names in AshTypescript field formatter34Monitor
- CVE-2026-82730Authorization-redacted field values disclosed through AshTypescript result normalization32Monitor
- CVE-2026-77856Unbounded atom creation from typed struct field names in AshTypescript field selector32Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- Later →CVE-2026-82731Aug 31, 2026 · Unescaped path parameters in AshTypescript generated TypeScript client allow request redirection9Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-82732Aug 31, 2026 · Declared argument constraints not enforced on AshTypescript typed controller routes25Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-82733Aug 31, 2026 · Route handler return value echoed into AshTypescript error response25Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| ash-project ash_typescript | 0.18.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
| ash-project ash_typescript | 59d8e985a98cf2e01794dbe5b919b897a95311f4 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Hex:ash_typescript | 0.18.0 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Peter Ullrichfinder
- Torkild Gundersen Kjevik / Ash Projectremediation developer
- Jonatan Männchen / EEFcoordinator
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2026-827330 days apartRoute handler return value echoed into AshTypescript error response25Monitor
- CVE-2026-10528342 days apartInternal error terms inspected into AshTypescript RPC error responses25Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-209 · Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive InformationCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.