Severity by source
AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Network-reachable Avo endpoint (AV:N), single crafted POST (AC:L), any authenticated Avo user suffices (PR:L), no UI; scope changes because Avo's auth boundary is bypassed to affect host-app tenancy (S:C), high C/I, no availability impact.
Primary rating from Vendor (https://github.com/avo-hq/avo).
CVSS VectorVendor: https://github.com/avo-hq/avo
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Lifecycle Timeline
2DescriptionCVE.org
Summary
A critical missing authorization flaw exists in Avo's association attach workflow. The UI and GET /resources/:resource/:id/:related/new path can check attach_<association>?, but the actual write endpoint, POST /resources/:resource/:id/:related, does not run the same authorization check before mutating the association.
As a result, an authenticated low-privileged Avo user can bypass hidden/disabled attach controls and directly attach related records to a parent record by sending a crafted POST request. In applications where associations represent teams, tenants, roles, projects, users, memberships, ownership, or other authorization-bearing relationships, this can lead to privilege escalation and cross-tenant data exposure.
Details
The association attach route writes relationships through Avo::AssociationsController#create:
# config/routes.rb
post "/:resource_name/:id/:related_name", to: "associations#create", as: "associations_create"The controller registers an attach authorization callback only for new, not for create:
# app/controllers/avo/associations_controller.rb
before_action :set_attachment_record, only: [:create, :destroy]
before_action :authorize_index_action, only: :index
before_action :authorize_attach_action, only: :new
before_action :authorize_detach_action, only: :destroyThe new action is only the form-rendering step. The actual mutation happens in create:
def create
if create_association
create_success_action
else
create_fail_action
end
endcreate_association then attaches the attacker-supplied related record to the parent:
def create_association
association_name = BaseResource.valid_association_name(@record, association_from_params)
perform_action_and_record_errors do
if through_reflection? && additional_params.present?
new_join_record.save
elsif has_many_reflection? || through_reflection?
@record.send(association_name) << @attachment_record
else
@record.send(:"#{association_name}=", @attachment_record)
@record.save!
end
end
endThe only attach-specific authorization helper is:
def authorize_attach_action
authorize_if_defined "attach_#{@field.id}?"
endBecause this helper is bound only to new, a policy that denies attach_users?, attach_teams?, attach_roles?, or similar methods blocks the UI/form path but does not protect the write path.
This is inconsistent with the detach path, which does authorize the mutating destroy action:
before_action :authorize_detach_action, only: :destroyThe bug is especially dangerous because Avo already treats association authorization as an access-control boundary in UI components:
# lib/avo/concerns/checks_assoc_authorization.rb
method_name = :"#{policy_method}_#{association_name}?".to_sym
if service.has_method?(method_name, raise_exception: false)
service.authorize_action(method_name, record:, raise_exception: false)
else
!Avo.configuration.explicit_authorization
endHowever, server-side enforcement is missing on the actual attach POST endpoint.
Proof of Concept
Prerequisites:
- A Rails application mounts Avo, for example at
/admin. - Avo authorization is enabled.
- A low-privileged user can authenticate to Avo.
- A parent record and a related record are both reachable by ID.
- The relevant policy denies attaching the relationship, for example:
def attach_users?
false
endExample target scenario:
- Parent resource:
projects - Parent ID:
1 - Related association:
users - Related user ID to attach:
42 - Expected policy: low-privileged users must not be able to attach users to projects.
The UI/form request may be blocked:
GET /admin/resources/projects/1/users/newBut the direct write endpoint can still be invoked:
POST /admin/resources/projects/1/users
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
authenticity_token=<CSRF>&fields[related_id]=42Run the attached PoC:
python poc_avo_association_attach_bypass.py \
--base-url http://localhost:3000 \
--avo-root /admin \
--cookie "_app_session=<LOW_PRIVILEGED_SESSION_COOKIE>" \
--parent-resource projects \
--parent-id 1 \
--related-name users \
--related-id 42 \
--check-newIf GET /new is forbidden or redirected but the direct POST succeeds, the authorization bypass is confirmed.
To perform the actual attach:
python poc_avo_association_attach_bypass.py \
--base-url http://localhost:3000 \
--avo-root /admin \
--cookie "_app_session=<LOW_PRIVILEGED_SESSION_COOKIE>" \
--parent-resource projects \
--parent-id 1 \
--related-name users \
--related-id 42 \
--confirm-attachExpected vulnerable result:
- The low-privileged user can attach the related record despite
attach_<association>?being denied. - The parent record now includes the related record.
Impact
This vulnerability allows unauthorized relationship manipulation through Avo.
Depending on the affected association, the impact can include:
- Privilege escalation by attaching a user to an admin group, privileged project, tenant, organization, role, or membership record.
- Cross-tenant data exposure when tenant/user/project membership determines record visibility.
- Integrity loss by changing ownership, assignment, access-control relationships, or business workflow state.
- Policy bypass even when Avo UI controls correctly hide the attach button or deny the attach form.
Recommended Fix
Enforce attach authorization on the mutating endpoint.
At minimum:
before_action :authorize_attach_action, only: [:new, :create]Additionally:
- Authorize against the parent record and the selected related record before writing the relationship.
- Ensure
createfails closed whenattach_<association>?is missing andexplicit_authorizationis enabled. - Add regression tests that directly POST to
/resources/:resource_name/:id/:related_namewhileattach_<association>?returnsfalse. - Verify
has_many,has_one,has_many :through, andhas_and_belongs_to_manyassociation paths all enforce the same server-side authorization.
Articles & Coverage 1
AnalysisAI
Authorization bypass in Avo (Ruby on Rails admin framework) versions <= 3.32.0 and 4.0.0.beta.1 through 4.0.0.beta.50 allows authenticated low-privileged users to attach arbitrary related records to parent resources via a direct POST to the associations endpoint, bypassing the attach_<association>? policy enforced only on the form-rendering GET. Publicly available exploit code exists (Python PoC in the GHSA advisory), and in deployments where associations encode teams, tenants, roles, or memberships, exploitation yields privilege escalation and cross-tenant data exposure.
Technical ContextAI
Avo is a Ruby on Rails admin panel framework distributed as the avo RubyGem. The flaw sits in Avo::AssociationsController where before_action :authorize_attach_action is registered only for the :new action (form rendering) but not for :create, the action bound to POST /resources/:resource_name/:id/:related_name that actually mutates the ActiveRecord association via <<, =, or join-record save. This is a classic CWE-639 (Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key / IDOR-class) issue, made worse by the asymmetry with the detach path which correctly authorizes :destroy. Because Avo's checks_assoc_authorization concern is treated by the UI as a real access boundary, downstream applications reasonably expect server-side enforcement that does not exist.
RemediationAI
Vendor-released patch: upgrade avo to 3.32.1 (3.x users) or 4.0.0.beta.51 (4.x beta users) as published in GHSA-8fq9-273g-6mrg (https://github.com/avo-hq/avo/security/advisories/GHSA-8fq9-273g-6mrg). If immediate upgrade is not possible, apply the vendor's recommended fix by monkey-patching Avo::AssociationsController to add before_action :authorize_attach_action, only: [:new, :create] and ensure explicit_authorization is enabled so missing attach_<association>? methods fail closed; the side effect is that any policy currently relying on the absence of the helper to implicitly allow attaches will now block, requiring an audit of policy classes. As a network-layer compensating control, restrict the Avo mount path (e.g. /admin) to trusted networks or block POST /admin/resources/:resource/:id/:related from non-admin user sessions at a reverse proxy or WAF, accepting that this disables legitimate attach workflows for affected roles.
Wazuh SIEM platform versions 4.4.0 through 4.9.0 contain an unsafe deserialization vulnerability in the DistributedAPI t
BentoML version 1.4.2 and earlier contains an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability through insecure deser
pgAdmin 4 contains critical remote code execution vulnerabilities in the Query Tool download and Cloud Deployment endpoi
The renderLocalView function in render/views.py in graphite-web in Graphite 0.9.5 through 0.9.10 uses the pickle Python
BentoML is a Python library for building online serving systems optimized for AI apps and model inference. Rated critica
OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h does not properly restrict processing of ChangeCiph
pyLoad download manager version prior to 0.5.0b3.dev77 exposes the Flask SECRET_KEY through an unauthenticated endpoint.
In Mercurial before 4.1.3, "hg serve --stdio" allows remote authenticated users to launch the Python debugger, and conse
Unauthenticated remote code execution in Marimo ≤0.20.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary system commands via the `/
pyLoad is the free and open-source Download Manager written in pure Python. Rated medium severity (CVSS 5.3), this vulne
Langflow (a visual LLM pipeline builder) contains a critical unauthenticated code execution vulnerability (CVE-2026-3301
Cross-user flow execution in Langflow (< 1.9.1) lets any authenticated API-key holder run another user's flow by passing
Share
External POC / Exploit Code
Leaving vuln.today
EUVD-2026-45334
GHSA-8fq9-273g-6mrg