GHSA-J9FC-W3MR-X6MV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-24 21:12 – Updated: 2026-07-24 21:12Summary
Budibase 3.39.19 (commit 03fbabae4) is affected by a privilege-escalation / missing-authorization flaw in the public role-assignment API. An app-scoped builder (a user who builds only specific apps — user.builder.apps = [appA], not a global builder or admin) can grant themselves builder access to ANY other app in the tenant, or assign themselves/any user an arbitrary data-plane role (e.g. ADMIN) in any app, by calling POST /api/public/v1/roles/assign. The endpoint only authorizes the two global flags (admin, builder); the per-app appBuilder and role:{appId,roleId} grant vectors are passed to the backend without any authorization check that the caller controls the target app. Reproduced in a local authorized lab using the verbatim authorization-gate and SDK logic.
This is an incomplete fix of the role-assignment hardening in commit d63d1d9054 ("Inline public user global role validation"), which only ever validated the global flags.
Details
The issue is caused by authorization being implemented as a flag-level allowlist (admin/builder) instead of validating the scope the caller is granting.
Relevant code paths:
packages/server/src/api/controllers/public/globalRoleValidation.ts—validateGlobalRoleUpdate(ctx, roleUpdate)only checksroleUpdate.admin(requiresisAdmin) androleUpdate.builder(requiresisGlobalBuilder). TheGlobalRoleUpdateinterface declares only{ builder?, admin? };appBuilderandroleare not referenced.packages/server/src/api/controllers/public/roles.ts—assign()doesconst { userIds, ...assignmentProps } = ctx.request.body; validateGlobalRoleUpdate(ctx, assignmentProps); await sdk.publicApi.roles.assign(userIds, assignmentProps). TheappBuilder/roleprops pass through unvalidated.packages/pro/src/sdk/publicApi/roles.ts—assign(): foropts.appBuilderit setsuser.builder = { apps: existing.concat([getProdWorkspaceID(opts.appBuilder.appId)]) }; foropts.roleit setsuser.roles[getProdWorkspaceID(opts.role.appId)] = opts.role.roleId. No check that the caller builds the target app, anduserIdsis an arbitrary list (bulkGet). The only gate is theisExpandedPublicApiEnabled()license check.packages/server/src/api/routes/public/index.ts—applyAdminRoutes(roleEndpoints)attaches onlymiddleware.builderOrAdmin(nopublicApi, noauthorized(PermissionType.USER, …)).packages/backend-core/src/middleware/builderOrAdmin.ts— with aworkspaceIdpresent, it only requiresisBuilder(ctx.user, workspaceId). The attacker setsx-budibase-app-idto their own app (appA), so the gate passes.packages/backend-core/src/middleware/builderOnly.ts— on the worker,POST /api/global/self/api_keyonly requireshasBuilderPermissions(ctx.user), which is true for app-scoped builders, so the attacker can self-issue a public API key.packages/shared-core/src/sdk/documents/users.ts—isGlobalBuilderis false for app-scoped builders (so the globalbuilderflag is correctly blocked), whileisBuilder(user, appA)andhasBuilderPermissions(user)are true.
Attack flow:
- Attacker is an app-scoped builder of
appAonly (no global builder/admin). POST /api/global/self/api_key(worker) — passesbuilderOnlyviahasBuilderPermissions→ attacker obtains a public API key.POST /api/public/v1/roles/assignwith headerx-budibase-app-id: <appA prod id>and body{"userIds":["<self>"],"appBuilder":{"appId":"<appB>"}}—builderOrAdminpasses (isBuilder(user, appA)),validateGlobalRoleUpdateignoresappBuilder, the SDK pushesappBintouser.builder.apps.- Attacker is now a builder of
appB(and, via therolevector, can set any data-role such asADMINin any app).
Security boundary crossed:
- Before: builder of
appAonly. - After: builder of
appB(and any other app) → read/modify all rows, read datasource configs and exfiltrate stored datasource credentials, edit automations (including thebash/executeScript/executeQuerysteps); plus arbitrary data-role assignment in any app. - Why disallowed: the per-app builder model is meant to isolate builders to their assigned apps; a builder of one app must not gain authority over apps they were never granted.
PoC
Environment:
- Budibase version:
3.39.19, commit03fbabae4 - Deployment: Business/Enterprise license required (
isExpandedPublicApiEnabled) - Attacker role: app-scoped builder (
user.builder.apps=[appA]), not global builder/admin - Mock services: none needed for the unit-level proof; HTTP PoC script provided for a licensed lab
Steps (unit-level proof, no license needed — verbatim auth-gate + SDK logic):
- Run the verification harness:
cd D:/CVE-Hunting/budibase-audit-output/lab
node harness/verify-privesc-authz.cjs
- Observed result (evidence:
evidence/lab-privesc-authz.log):
[PASS-VALIDATION] appBuilder:{appId:APP_B} -> NOT rejected
[PASS-VALIDATION] role:{appId:APP_B, roleId:'ADMIN'}-> NOT rejected
[BLOCKED 403] builder:true (global) -> Only global builders or admins ...
[BLOCKED 403] admin:true (global) -> Only global admins ...
after : builder={"apps":["app_A...","app_B..."]} roles={"app_B...":"ADMIN"}
isBuilder(attacker, APP_B) now = true <-- escalated to builder of APP_B
Steps (HTTP PoC for a licensed lab — poc/privesc-roles-assign.sh):
# 1) self-issue API key
curl -X POST http://localhost:10000/api/global/self/api_key -H "Cookie: <attacker session>" -d '{}'
# 2) escalate: grant self builder of appB
curl -X POST http://localhost:10000/api/public/v1/roles/assign \
-H "x-budibase-api-key: <KEY>" -H "x-budibase-app-id: <appA prod id>" \
-H "content-type: application/json" \
-d '{"userIds":["<self global id>"],"appBuilder":{"appId":"<appB>"}}'
- Expected result:
The request should be rejected (403) — an app-scoped builder must not be able to grant
itself builder/role access to an app it does not control. Instead it returns 200 and the
grant is applied.
Evidence files:
evidence/lab-privesc-authz.logpoc/verify-privesc-authz.cjs,poc/privesc-roles-assign.sh
Runtime limitation: full HTTP end-to-end requires a Business/Enterprise license (isExpandedPublicApiEnabled); no license was cracked. The authorization defect is proven at unit level with the verbatim validation + SDK logic, and the route→validation→SDK call chain was independently verified by source review.
Source PoC
Impact
An attacker holding an app-scoped builder role on a single app in a licensed (Business/Enterprise) tenant can:
- escalate to builder of every other app in the tenant (cross-app/workspace isolation bypass);
- read and modify all rows in those apps;
- read those apps' datasource configurations and exfiltrate stored datasource credentials;
- edit automations in those apps, including server-side execution steps;
- assign arbitrary data-plane roles (e.g.
ADMIN) in any app to any user, including themselves.
It does not grant the global admin/builder flags (those are validated), so it is not a direct global-admin takeover; but cross-app builder is effectively a tenant-wide app/data-plane compromise. No real secrets were accessed during testing; the lab used canary-only data.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@budibase/server"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "3.38.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-269",
"CWE-862",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-24T21:12:40Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nBudibase `3.39.19` (commit `03fbabae4`) is affected by a privilege-escalation / missing-authorization flaw in the public role-assignment API. An **app-scoped builder** (a user who builds only specific apps \u2014 `user.builder.apps = [appA]`, not a global builder or admin) can grant **themselves builder access to ANY other app in the tenant**, or assign themselves/any user an arbitrary data-plane role (e.g. `ADMIN`) in any app, by calling `POST /api/public/v1/roles/assign`. The endpoint only authorizes the two *global* flags (`admin`, `builder`); the per-app `appBuilder` and `role:{appId,roleId}` grant vectors are passed to the backend **without any authorization check that the caller controls the target app**. Reproduced in a local authorized lab using the verbatim authorization-gate and SDK logic.\n\nThis is an incomplete fix of the role-assignment hardening in commit `d63d1d9054` (\"Inline public user global role validation\"), which only ever validated the global flags.\n\n### Details\n\nThe issue is caused by authorization being implemented as a **flag-level allowlist** (`admin`/`builder`) instead of validating the *scope* the caller is granting.\n\nRelevant code paths:\n\n- `packages/server/src/api/controllers/public/globalRoleValidation.ts` \u2014 `validateGlobalRoleUpdate(ctx, roleUpdate)` only checks `roleUpdate.admin` (requires `isAdmin`) and `roleUpdate.builder` (requires `isGlobalBuilder`). The `GlobalRoleUpdate` interface declares only `{ builder?, admin? }`; `appBuilder` and `role` are not referenced.\n- `packages/server/src/api/controllers/public/roles.ts` \u2014 `assign()` does `const { userIds, ...assignmentProps } = ctx.request.body; validateGlobalRoleUpdate(ctx, assignmentProps); await sdk.publicApi.roles.assign(userIds, assignmentProps)`. The `appBuilder`/`role` props pass through unvalidated.\n- `packages/pro/src/sdk/publicApi/roles.ts` \u2014 `assign()`: for `opts.appBuilder` it sets `user.builder = { apps: existing.concat([getProdWorkspaceID(opts.appBuilder.appId)]) }`; for `opts.role` it sets `user.roles[getProdWorkspaceID(opts.role.appId)] = opts.role.roleId`. No check that the caller builds the target app, and `userIds` is an arbitrary list (`bulkGet`). The only gate is the `isExpandedPublicApiEnabled()` license check.\n- `packages/server/src/api/routes/public/index.ts` \u2014 `applyAdminRoutes(roleEndpoints)` attaches **only** `middleware.builderOrAdmin` (no `publicApi`, no `authorized(PermissionType.USER, \u2026)`).\n- `packages/backend-core/src/middleware/builderOrAdmin.ts` \u2014 with a `workspaceId` present, it only requires `isBuilder(ctx.user, workspaceId)`. The attacker sets `x-budibase-app-id` to **their own** app (appA), so the gate passes.\n- `packages/backend-core/src/middleware/builderOnly.ts` \u2014 on the worker, `POST /api/global/self/api_key` only requires `hasBuilderPermissions(ctx.user)`, which is true for app-scoped builders, so the attacker can self-issue a public API key.\n- `packages/shared-core/src/sdk/documents/users.ts` \u2014 `isGlobalBuilder` is false for app-scoped builders (so the global `builder` flag is correctly blocked), while `isBuilder(user, appA)` and `hasBuilderPermissions(user)` are true.\n\nAttack flow:\n\n1. Attacker is an app-scoped builder of `appA` only (no global builder/admin).\n2. `POST /api/global/self/api_key` (worker) \u2014 passes `builderOnly` via `hasBuilderPermissions` \u2192 attacker obtains a public API key.\n3. `POST /api/public/v1/roles/assign` with header `x-budibase-app-id: \u003cappA prod id\u003e` and body `{\"userIds\":[\"\u003cself\u003e\"],\"appBuilder\":{\"appId\":\"\u003cappB\u003e\"}}` \u2014 `builderOrAdmin` passes (`isBuilder(user, appA)`), `validateGlobalRoleUpdate` ignores `appBuilder`, the SDK pushes `appB` into `user.builder.apps`.\n4. Attacker is now a builder of `appB` (and, via the `role` vector, can set any data-role such as `ADMIN` in any app).\n\nSecurity boundary crossed:\n\n- **Before:** builder of `appA` only.\n- **After:** builder of `appB` (and any other app) \u2192 read/modify all rows, read datasource configs and exfiltrate stored datasource credentials, edit automations (including the `bash`/`executeScript`/`executeQuery` steps); plus arbitrary data-role assignment in any app.\n- **Why disallowed:** the per-app builder model is meant to isolate builders to their assigned apps; a builder of one app must not gain authority over apps they were never granted.\n\n### PoC\n\nEnvironment:\n\n- Budibase version: `3.39.19`, commit `03fbabae4`\n- Deployment: Business/Enterprise license required (`isExpandedPublicApiEnabled`)\n- Attacker role: app-scoped builder (`user.builder.apps=[appA]`), not global builder/admin\n- Mock services: none needed for the unit-level proof; HTTP PoC script provided for a licensed lab\n\nSteps (unit-level proof, no license needed \u2014 verbatim auth-gate + SDK logic):\n\n1. Run the verification harness:\n\n```bash\ncd D:/CVE-Hunting/budibase-audit-output/lab\nnode harness/verify-privesc-authz.cjs\n```\n\n2. Observed result (evidence: `evidence/lab-privesc-authz.log`):\n\n```text\n[PASS-VALIDATION] appBuilder:{appId:APP_B} -\u003e NOT rejected\n[PASS-VALIDATION] role:{appId:APP_B, roleId:\u0027ADMIN\u0027}-\u003e NOT rejected\n[BLOCKED 403] builder:true (global) -\u003e Only global builders or admins ...\n[BLOCKED 403] admin:true (global) -\u003e Only global admins ...\nafter : builder={\"apps\":[\"app_A...\",\"app_B...\"]} roles={\"app_B...\":\"ADMIN\"}\nisBuilder(attacker, APP_B) now = true \u003c-- escalated to builder of APP_B\n```\n\nSteps (HTTP PoC for a licensed lab \u2014 `poc/privesc-roles-assign.sh`):\n\n```bash\n# 1) self-issue API key\ncurl -X POST http://localhost:10000/api/global/self/api_key -H \"Cookie: \u003cattacker session\u003e\" -d \u0027{}\u0027\n# 2) escalate: grant self builder of appB\ncurl -X POST http://localhost:10000/api/public/v1/roles/assign \\\n -H \"x-budibase-api-key: \u003cKEY\u003e\" -H \"x-budibase-app-id: \u003cappA prod id\u003e\" \\\n -H \"content-type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"userIds\":[\"\u003cself global id\u003e\"],\"appBuilder\":{\"appId\":\"\u003cappB\u003e\"}}\u0027\n```\n\n3. Expected result:\n\n```text\nThe request should be rejected (403) \u2014 an app-scoped builder must not be able to grant\nitself builder/role access to an app it does not control. Instead it returns 200 and the\ngrant is applied.\n```\n\nEvidence files:\n\n- `evidence/lab-privesc-authz.log`\n- `poc/verify-privesc-authz.cjs`, `poc/privesc-roles-assign.sh`\n\n**Runtime limitation:** full HTTP end-to-end requires a Business/Enterprise license (`isExpandedPublicApiEnabled`); no license was cracked. The authorization defect is proven at unit level with the verbatim validation + SDK logic, and the route\u2192validation\u2192SDK call chain was independently verified by source review.\n\n### Source PoC\n\n[Budibase-GHSA-Reports.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/29161435/Budibase-GHSA-Reports.zip)\n\n### Impact\n\nAn attacker holding an **app-scoped builder** role on a single app in a licensed (Business/Enterprise) tenant can:\n\n* escalate to builder of **every other app** in the tenant (cross-app/workspace isolation bypass);\n* read and modify all rows in those apps;\n* read those apps\u0027 datasource configurations and **exfiltrate stored datasource credentials**;\n* edit automations in those apps, including server-side execution steps;\n* assign arbitrary data-plane roles (e.g. `ADMIN`) in any app to any user, including themselves.\n\nIt does **not** grant the global `admin`/`builder` flags (those are validated), so it is not a direct global-admin takeover; but cross-app builder is effectively a tenant-wide app/data-plane compromise. No real secrets were accessed during testing; the lab used canary-only data.",
"id": "GHSA-j9fc-w3mr-x6mv",
"modified": "2026-07-24T21:12:40Z",
"published": "2026-07-24T21:12:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Budibase/budibase/security/advisories/GHSA-j9fc-w3mr-x6mv"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/Budibase/budibase"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Budibase/budibase/releases/tag/3.40.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": " Budibase: Privilege escalation via public role assignment API missing app-level authorization"
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.