AI Threat Alert
CVE-2026-100605
HIGHFlowise through 3.1.4 contains missing route-level RBAC checks on chat message endpoints that allow low-privileged API keys to read and delete chat history. Attackers with valid but low-privileged API keys can access GET and DELETE chat message routes without required flow permissions to read chat...
Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
No patch available
Monitor for updates. Consider compensating controls or temporary mitigations.
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-100605?
Flowise through 3.1.4 contains missing route-level RBAC checks on chat message endpoints that allow low-privileged API keys to read and delete chat history. Attackers with valid but low-privileged API keys can access GET and DELETE chat message routes without required flow permissions to read chat histories, prompts, model responses, and delete messages.
Is CVE-2026-100605 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-100605 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2026-100605?
No patch is currently available. Monitor vendor advisories for updates.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-100605?
CVE-2026-100605 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.1 (HIGH).
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
Flowise through 3.1.4 contains missing route-level RBAC checks on chat message endpoints that allow low-privileged API keys to read and delete chat history. Attackers with valid but low-privileged API keys can access GET and DELETE chat message routes without required flow permissions to read chat histories, prompts, model responses, and delete messages.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-862 — Missing Authorization: The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
- [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].
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H