Skip to content

Flowise: Mass Assignment in PUT /api/v1/user Allows Authenticated Users to Override Password Hash and Bypass Password Change Verification

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 14, 2026 in FlowiseAI/Flowise • Updated May 20, 2026

Package

npm flowise (npm)

Affected versions

<= 3.1.1

Patched versions

3.1.2

Description

Summary

A Mass Assignment vulnerability in the PUT /api/v1/user endpoint allows authenticated users to directly modify restricted user fields, including the credential (password hash), bypassing the intended password change workflow.

Because the endpoint forwards the entire request body to the service layer without filtering, an attacker can override the credential field without providing the current password.

This bypasses several security protections including:

  • old password verification
  • password hashing enforcement
  • password policy validation
  • session invalidation on password change

While the vulnerability cannot be used to modify other users due to an ID check in the controller, it allows attackers who obtain a temporary session (e.g., via token theft or XSS) to establish persistent account access.

Details

The endpoint PUT /api/v1/user allows authenticated users to update their user profile.

The controller checks that the authenticated user matches the provided id, preventing direct IDOR:

const currentUser = req.user
const { id } = req.body

if (currentUser.id !== id) {
    throw new InternalFlowiseError(StatusCodes.FORBIDDEN)
}

However, the controller forwards the entire request body directly to the service layer without filtering:

const user = await userService.updateUser(req.body)

Inside UserService.updateUser, the incoming data is merged into the existing user entity:

updatedUser = queryRunner.manager.merge(User, oldUserData, newUserData)

Because newUserData is derived from req.body and there is no field allowlist, any field present in the User entity may be modified.

This includes sensitive fields such as:

  • credential
  • tempToken
  • tokenExpiry
  • status
  • email

The service implements a secure password change workflow that requires the following fields:

oldPassword
newPassword
confirmPassword

Example code:

if (newUserData.oldPassword && newUserData.newPassword && newUserData.confirmPassword) {
    if (!compareHash(newUserData.oldPassword, oldUserData.credential)) {
        throw new InternalFlowiseError(StatusCodes.BAD_REQUEST)
    }

    newUserData.credential = this.encryptUserCredential(newUserData.newPassword)
}

However, this logic can be bypassed by directly supplying a credential value in the request body.

Because the merge operation applies all fields from newUserData, the supplied credential hash will overwrite the stored password hash.

PoC

Step 1 - Authenticate

Login as any normal user and obtain a valid JWT token.

POST /api/v1/auth/login

Step 2 - Generate a password hash

Generate a bcrypt hash for a password you control.

Example:

bcrypt("attacker_password")

Example hash:

$2b$10$abc123examplehashvalue...

Step 3 - Send crafted update request

PUT /api/v1/user
Authorization: Bearer <JWT_TOKEN>
Content-Type: application/json

{
  "id": "<your-user-id>",
  "credential": "$2b$10$abc123examplehashvalue..."
}

Step 4 - Login with attacker password

The password hash in the database is replaced by the supplied value.

The attacker can now authenticate using:

attacker_password

without ever providing the previous password.

Impact

This vulnerability allows authenticated users to bypass the password change security controls.

Security protections that are bypassed include:

current password verification

password hashing enforcement

password policy validation

session invalidation on password change

Although the controller prevents modification of other users' accounts, the vulnerability enables persistence after account compromise.

Example attack scenario:

  • An attacker temporarily obtains a user's session (XSS, token leak, shared device, etc.)
  • The attacker sends the crafted update request with a new password hash
  • The attacker now permanently controls the account
  • Authentication logic bypass
  • Privilege persistence after compromise
  • Weak account recovery guarantees

References

@igor-magun-wd igor-magun-wd published to FlowiseAI/Flowise May 14, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 20, 2026
Reviewed May 20, 2026
Last updated May 20, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity High
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes

The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-59fh-9f3p-7m39

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.