CVE-2026-96581: An upsert on the primary key in Ash ignores attribute multitenancy, so one tenant can read, overwrite and take over another tenant's records
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- 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: 0.25% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: ash-project ash 3.37.2, c9f0cdb31e7c084def05f3f5be69dd7bb7721754.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to ash-project ash 3.37.2, c9f0cdb31e7c084def05f3f5be69dd7bb7721754 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
Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in ash-project ash allows a user of one tenant to read, overwrite and take over another tenant's records via an upserting create action. Under attribute multitenancy, Ash.Actions.Create (lib/ash/actions/create/create.ex) and Ash.Actions.Create.Bulk (lib/ash/actions/create/bulk.ex) upserted on the primary key, or on an all_tenants? identity, without scoping the conflicting record to the request's tenant. A caller of a create action with upsert? true that accepts the primary key, supplying a record id from another tenant, updated that record's upsert fields and received all of its attributes in the result. With the default upsert fields the tenant attribute was written too, moving the record into the caller's tenant. Read and update policies do not run for upserts, and tenant-scoped create policies pass because the tenant is the caller's own. This issue affects ash: from 1.22.0 before 3.37.2.
- Published
- Oct 26, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 26, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 17th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-639
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.6 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · EEF
- 7.6
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
- 1.22.0 and later · before 3.37.2affected · semver
- 2333d01ddf37e5909769a513059b27e3183331c5 and later · before c9f0cdb31e7c084def05f3f5be69dd7bb7721754affected · 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 | from 1.22.0 · before 3.37.2 | 3.37.2 |
Same product
ash-project: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2025-48044Authorization bypass when bypass policy condition evaluates to true34Monitor
- CVE-2025-48043Bypass and runtime policies that can never pass may be incorrectly applied in filter authorization34Monitor
- CVE-2026-94201Filtering an :atom attribute with unsafe_to_atom? can exhaust the BEAM atom table in Ash32Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-93477Sep 25, 2026 · Private action arguments can be set by user input on the bulk destroy and bulk update paths in Ash23Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-101028Oct 9, 2026 · Ash.count, Ash.exists and Ash.aggregate skip related resources' read policies in filters and sorts24Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-114214Oct 25, 2026 · Loading a through relationship with a limit of 1 in Ash ignores the through path and returns unrelated destination records24Monitor
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 | 3.37.2 | Vendor (CNA) |
| ash-project ash | c9f0cdb31e7c084def05f3f5be69dd7bb7721754 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Hex:ash | 3.37.2 | 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.
- Published
- Fix recordedsame day
- TodayNov 10, 2026+15 d
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.
- Will Townsendfinder
- Zach Daniel / Ash Projectremediation developer
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
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.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-639 · Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled KeyCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
Root cause
The endpoint fetches the record by the ID sent in the request, but never checks whether the record belongs to the requesting user.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-639 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const invoice = await Invoice.findById(req.params.id);
res.json(invoice);Fixed
const invoice = await Invoice.findOne({
id: req.params.id,
ownerId: req.user.id,
});
if (!invoice) return res.sendStatus(404);
res.json(invoice);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
Change log
- SSVC exploitation— → none
- Exploit maturity— → none
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (4 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.