GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx: Flowise: Mass assignment enables cross-tenant store takeover

GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx HIGH
Published April 17, 2026
CISO Take

Flowise's DocumentStore creation endpoint accepts client-supplied primary keys without validation, causing TypeORM's save() to behave as an upsert — any authenticated user can overwrite any DocumentStore object by supplying a known UUID. In multi-tenant Flowise deployments, this is a critical BOLA flaw: an attacker in Workspace B can hijack Workspace A's DocumentStore, overwriting its embedding provider, vector store, and record management configuration, corrupting the entire RAG pipeline for that workspace. With 59 prior CVEs in this package and no EPSS data yet available, the attack is trivially executable by any authenticated user who can obtain a valid UUID through normal API interaction. Organizations running Flowise in shared or multi-tenant environments should upgrade to 3.1.0 immediately; until patched, restrict the DocumentStore create endpoint to authorized IP ranges and audit POST /api/v1/document-store requests for unexpected id fields.

Sources: GitHub Advisory ATLAS

What is the risk?

High risk in multi-tenant environments. Exploitation requires authentication but is otherwise trivial — no special tools or AI knowledge needed, just a valid session and a target UUID. UUIDs are predictably exposed through normal API usage, making enumeration straightforward. The amplified risk stems from the AI context: DocumentStore controls embedding and vector store configuration, so a successful takeover corrupts AI retrieval workflows at the infrastructure level rather than just modifying business data. The 59 prior CVEs in this package suggest a historically weak security posture and ongoing active vulnerability research against Flowise.

How does the attack unfold?

Initial Access
Attacker authenticates to a shared or multi-tenant Flowise instance using a valid account in their own workspace.
AML.T0012
Reconnaissance
Attacker observes DocumentStore UUIDs exposed in their own API responses and probes the API to enumerate UUIDs belonging to target workspaces.
AML.T0006
Exploitation
Attacker submits POST /api/v1/document-store with the victim workspace's DocumentStore UUID and a malicious configuration payload, triggering an implicit UPSERT with no ownership check.
AML.T0049
Impact
Victim workspace's RAG pipeline is corrupted as embedding, vector store, and record management configuration now routes through attacker-controlled infrastructure, enabling data exfiltration and AI response manipulation.
AML.T0081

What systems are affected?

Package Ecosystem Vulnerable Range Patched
Flowise npm <= 3.0.13 3.1.0

Do you use Flowise? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1
N/A
EPSS
N/A
Exploitation Status
No known exploitation
Sophistication
Moderate

What should I do?

5 steps
  1. Upgrade Flowise to version 3.1.0 immediately — this is the only complete fix.

  2. If patching is delayed, add server-side middleware to strip the id field from POST /api/v1/document-store request bodies before they reach the service layer.

  3. Restrict the DocumentStore API endpoint to trusted internal networks using firewall rules or reverse proxy ACLs.

  4. Audit PostgreSQL for unexpected UPDATE operations on the documentstore table triggered via the create path — specifically look for UPDATE events where the caller's workspaceId differs from the stored workspaceId.

  5. Review all TypeORM repository.save() call sites for similar UPSERT semantics on client-supplied primary keys across the codebase.

How is it classified?

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

This CVE is relevant to:

EU AI Act
Art. 9 - Risk management system Article 15 - Accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity Article 9 - Risk management system
ISO 42001
A.10.1 - AI system security A.6.1.2 - Information security roles and responsibilities A.6.2 - AI system roles and responsibilities A.9.3 - Access to AI systems
NIST AI RMF
GOVERN 1.1 - Policies and procedures for AI risk GOVERN 1.2 - Accountability structures MANAGE 2.2 - Mechanisms for AI risk treatment
OWASP LLM Top 10
LLM07 - Insecure Plugin Design LLM08:2025 - Vector and Embedding Weaknesses

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx?

Flowise's DocumentStore creation endpoint accepts client-supplied primary keys without validation, causing TypeORM's save() to behave as an upsert — any authenticated user can overwrite any DocumentStore object by supplying a known UUID. In multi-tenant Flowise deployments, this is a critical BOLA flaw: an attacker in Workspace B can hijack Workspace A's DocumentStore, overwriting its embedding provider, vector store, and record management configuration, corrupting the entire RAG pipeline for that workspace. With 59 prior CVEs in this package and no EPSS data yet available, the attack is trivially executable by any authenticated user who can obtain a valid UUID through normal API interaction. Organizations running Flowise in shared or multi-tenant environments should upgrade to 3.1.0 immediately; until patched, restrict the DocumentStore create endpoint to authorized IP ranges and audit POST /api/v1/document-store requests for unexpected id fields.

Is GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx?

1. Upgrade Flowise to version 3.1.0 immediately — this is the only complete fix. 2. If patching is delayed, add server-side middleware to strip the id field from POST /api/v1/document-store request bodies before they reach the service layer. 3. Restrict the DocumentStore API endpoint to trusted internal networks using firewall rules or reverse proxy ACLs. 4. Audit PostgreSQL for unexpected UPDATE operations on the documentstore table triggered via the create path — specifically look for UPDATE events where the caller's workspaceId differs from the stored workspaceId. 5. Review all TypeORM repository.save() call sites for similar UPSERT semantics on client-supplied primary keys across the codebase.

What systems are affected by GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx?

This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: RAG pipelines, agent frameworks, multi-tenant AI platforms, document indexing pipelines, vector database integrations.

What is the CVSS score for GHSA-3prp-9gf7-4rxx?

No CVSS score has been assigned yet.

What is the AI security impact?

Affected AI Architectures

RAG pipelinesagent frameworksmulti-tenant AI platformsdocument indexing pipelinesvector database integrations

MITRE ATLAS Techniques

AML.T0006 Active Scanning
AML.T0012 Valid Accounts
AML.T0049 Exploit Public-Facing Application
AML.T0064 Gather RAG-Indexed Targets
AML.T0080 AI Agent Context Poisoning
AML.T0081 Modify AI Agent Configuration
AML.T0085.000 RAG Databases

Compliance Controls Affected

EU AI Act: Art. 9, Article 15, Article 9
ISO 42001: A.10.1, A.6.1.2, A.6.2, A.9.3
NIST AI RMF: GOVERN 1.1, GOVERN 1.2, MANAGE 2.2
OWASP LLM Top 10: LLM07, LLM08:2025

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary A Mass Assignment vulnerability in the DocumentStore creation endpoint allows authenticated users to control the primary key (id) and internal state fields of DocumentStore entities. Because the service uses repository.save() with a client-supplied primary key, the POST create endpoint behaves as an implicit UPSERT operation. This enables overwriting existing DocumentStore objects. In multi-workspace or multi-tenant deployments, this can lead to cross-workspace object takeover and broken object-level authorization (IDOR), allowing an attacker to reassign or modify DocumentStore objects belonging to other workspaces. ### Details The DocumentStore entity defines a globally unique primary key: ```typescript @PrimaryGeneratedColumn('uuid') id: string ``` The create logic is implemented as: ```typescript const documentStore = repo.create(newDocumentStore) const dbResponse = await repo.save(documentStore) ``` Here is no DTO allowlist or field filtering before persistence. The entire request body is mapped directly to the entity. TypeORM save() behavior: 1. If the primary key (id) exists → UPDATE 2. If not → INSERT Because id is accepted from the client, the create endpoint effectively functions as an UPSERT endpoint. This allows an authenticated user to submit: ```json { "id": "<existing_store_id>", "name": "modified", "description": "modified", "status": "SYNC", "embeddingConfig": "...", "vectorStoreConfig": "...", "recordManagerConfig": "..." } ``` If a DocumentStore with the supplied id already exists, save() performs an UPDATE rather than creating a new record. Importantly: The primary key is globally unique (uuid) It is not composite with workspaceId The create path does not enforce ownership validation before calling save() This introduces a broken object-level authorization risk. If an attacker can obtain or enumerate a valid DocumentStore UUID belonging to another workspace, they can: Submit a POST create request with that UUID. Trigger an UPDATE on the existing record. Potentially overwrite fields including workspaceId, effectively reassigning the object to their own workspace. Because the service layer does not verify that the existing record belongs to the caller’s workspace before updating, this may result in cross-workspace object takeover. Additionally, several service functions retrieve DocumentStore entities by id without consistently scoping by workspaceId, increasing the risk of IDOR if controller-level protections are bypassed or misconfigured. ### PoC 1. Create a normal DocumentStore in Workspace A. 2. Capture its id from the API response. 3. From Workspace B (or another authenticated context), submit: ```http POST /api/v1/document-store Content-Type: application/json { "id": "<id_from_workspace_A>", "name": "hijacked", "description": "hijacked" } ``` Because the service uses repository.save() with a client-supplied primary key: - The existing record is updated. - The object may become reassigned depending on how workspaceId is handled at controller level. - If workspaceId is overwritten during the create flow, the store is effectively migrated to the attacker’s workspace. - This demonstrates object takeover via UPSERT semantics on a create endpoint. ### Impact This vulnerability enables: - Mass Assignment on server-managed fields - Overwrite of existing objects via implicit UPSERT behavior - Broken Object Level Authorization (BOLA) - Potential cross-workspace object takeover in multi-tenant deployments - In a SaaS or shared-workspace environment, an attacker who can obtain or guess a valid UUID may modify or reassign DocumentStore objects belonging to other tenants. Because DocumentStore objects control embedding providers, vector store configuration, and record management logic, successful takeover can affect data indexing, retrieval, and AI workflow execution. This represents a high-risk authorization flaw in multi-tenant environments.

Exploitation Scenario

An attacker with a valid Flowise account on a shared SaaS platform creates their own DocumentStore and records the UUID from the API response. They identify a target organization's workspace through normal platform enumeration. The attacker then submits POST /api/v1/document-store with the victim's DocumentStore UUID and a modified embeddingConfig pointing to an attacker-controlled embedding API endpoint. TypeORM detects the existing UUID and performs an UPDATE rather than an INSERT, overwriting the legitimate configuration with no ownership check. From that point, every document ingested by the victim workspace is processed through the attacker's embedding service, enabling exfiltration of all indexed content and potential manipulation of AI agent responses through poisoned vector representations inserted into the victim's retrieval pipeline.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-284 — Improper Access Control: The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.

  • [Architecture and Design, Operation] Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
  • [Architecture and Design] Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.

Timeline

Published
April 17, 2026
Last Modified
April 17, 2026
First Seen
April 18, 2026

Related Vulnerabilities