AI Threat AlertCVE-2026-91934: Flowise: path traversal in SQL chain enables RCE
HIGHFlowise before 3.1.4 does not validate file paths in the SQL Database Chain node when connecting to SQLite, so any authenticated user can write arbitrary files to the host, including into the web root or system directories. The vendor advisory title (via VulnCheck) frames this as remote code execution, and the CVSS score of 8.8 reflects full confidentiality, integrity and availability impact from a low-privilege account over the network. Near-term exploitation pressure is modest: EPSS is 0.74% (top 47%), the CVE is not in CISA KEV, no public exploit or Nuclei template exists, and CISA SSVC says TRACK. Still, Flowise instances often hold LLM API keys and database credentials, so a compromised low-privilege or shared account can become host takeover. Upgrade to Flowise 3.1.4 or later, and until you can, restrict who can build or edit flows that use the SQL Database Chain node.
What is the risk?
High severity, moderate near-term likelihood. Exploitation needs only low privileges and no user interaction, and complexity is low. Exposure is highest where Flowise is internet-facing or shared by many builders, tenants or contractors. Signals of active exploitation are absent today (no KEV, no public PoC, no scanner template, SSVC TRACK, EPSS 0.74%), but arbitrary file write to the web root is a well-understood primitive that can be weaponized quickly once details spread. Dependent counts and scorecard data are unavailable, so blast radius across the ecosystem cannot be quantified (no data).
How does the attack unfold?
What systems are affected?
| Package | Ecosystem | Vulnerable Range | Patched |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flowise | npm | — | No patch |
Do you use Flowise? You're affected.
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
1 step1) Upgrade Flowise to 3.1.4 or later. 2) Until patched, remove or disable the SQL Database Chain node, or limit flow creation and editing to trusted administrators. 3) Do not expose Flowise directly to the internet; put it behind SSO, VPN or an authenticated reverse proxy. 4) Run Flowise as a non-root user in a container with a read-only filesystem except for required data directories, and keep the web root non-writable by the application. 5) Detect: review flow definitions and logs for SQL Database Chain nodes with SQLite paths pointing outside the expected data directory, look for path traversal sequences (../) in flow parameters, and monitor for unexpected new or modified files in the web root and system paths. 6) Rotate API keys and database credentials stored in Flowise if suspicious file writes are found.
What does CISA's SSVC say?
Source: CISA Vulnrichment (SSVC v2.0). Decision based on the CISA Coordinator decision tree.
How is it classified?
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
This CVE is relevant to:
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-91934?
Flowise before 3.1.4 does not validate file paths in the SQL Database Chain node when connecting to SQLite, so any authenticated user can write arbitrary files to the host, including into the web root or system directories. The vendor advisory title (via VulnCheck) frames this as remote code execution, and the CVSS score of 8.8 reflects full confidentiality, integrity and availability impact from a low-privilege account over the network. Near-term exploitation pressure is modest: EPSS is 0.74% (top 47%), the CVE is not in CISA KEV, no public exploit or Nuclei template exists, and CISA SSVC says TRACK. Still, Flowise instances often hold LLM API keys and database credentials, so a compromised low-privilege or shared account can become host takeover. Upgrade to Flowise 3.1.4 or later, and until you can, restrict who can build or edit flows that use the SQL Database Chain node.
Is CVE-2026-91934 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-91934 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2026-91934?
1) Upgrade Flowise to 3.1.4 or later. 2) Until patched, remove or disable the SQL Database Chain node, or limit flow creation and editing to trusted administrators. 3) Do not expose Flowise directly to the internet; put it behind SSO, VPN or an authenticated reverse proxy. 4) Run Flowise as a non-root user in a container with a read-only filesystem except for required data directories, and keep the web root non-writable by the application. 5) Detect: review flow definitions and logs for SQL Database Chain nodes with SQLite paths pointing outside the expected data directory, look for path traversal sequences (../) in flow parameters, and monitor for unexpected new or modified files in the web root and system paths. 6) Rotate API keys and database credentials stored in Flowise if suspicious file writes are found.
What systems are affected by CVE-2026-91934?
This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: Agent frameworks, LLM workflow builders, Low-code chatbot platforms, RAG pipelines, Self-hosted LLM orchestration.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-91934?
CVE-2026-91934 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (HIGH). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.74%.
What is the AI security impact?
Affected AI Architectures
MITRE ATLAS Techniques
AML.T0012Valid AccountsAML.T0049Exploit Public-Facing ApplicationAML.T0050Command and Scripting InterpreterAML.T0055Unsecured CredentialsCompliance Controls Affected
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
Flowise versions before 3.1.4 fail to validate file paths in the SQL Database Chain node when connecting to SQLite databases, allowing authenticated attackers to write arbitrary files. Attackers can write malicious SQLite databases to system directories or inject files into the web root to execute commands or perform stored XSS attacks.
Exploitation Scenario
An attacker obtains a low-privilege Flowise account, for example through credential reuse, a shared tenant, or a compromised contractor. They create or edit a flow with a SQL Database Chain node and set the SQLite database path to a traversal path pointing at the application web root or another writable system directory. Running the flow causes Flowise to create a SQLite file at that location, with attacker-controlled content embedded in it (for example a script or HTML payload). The planted file is then served or executed, giving command execution on the host or stored XSS against administrators. From there the attacker harvests LLM API keys and database credentials and pivots into connected data stores.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted DirectoryPrimaryCWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted DirectoryCWE-22 — Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory: The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
- [Implementation] Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylis
- [Architecture and Design] For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HReferences
Timeline
Related Vulnerabilities
CVE-2025-7133810.0Flowise: unauthenticated file write enables RCE
Same package: flowiseCVE-2025-5952810.0Flowise: Unauthenticated RCE via MCP config injection
Same package: flowiseCVE-2025-619139.9Flowise: path traversal in file tools leads to RCE
Same package: flowiseCVE-2026-409339.9Flowise: RCE via MCP stdio command injection
Same package: flowiseCVE-2026-464429.9Flowise: sandbox escape enables authenticated RCE
Same package: flowise