Skip to main content

MaxKB EUVDEUVD-2026-84156

| CVE-2026-77523 HIGH
Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639)
2026-09-21 GitHub_M
7.4
CVSS 3.1 · Vendor: GitHub_M
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Access
    Obtain authenticated account with model-read in controlled workspace
  2. Delivery
    Enumerate/obtain victim model_id from another workspace
  3. Exploit
    Submit model param form request with foreign model_id
  4. Execution
    Serializer loads Model by id without workspace_id check
  5. Persist
    Read or overwrite victim's model_params_form
  6. Impact
    Altered defaults corrupt victim workflows

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A01:2025 - Broken Access Control
ASVS 5.0
V8 - Authorization Object-level authorization, IDOR prevention
Exploitation Conditions

Requires an authenticated MaxKB account (<=2.10.3-lts) that holds model-read permission in a workspace the attacker controls, plus knowledge of a valid model_id belonging to a victim workspace. The flaw is reachable specifically through the model parameter form route, where ModelSerializer.ModelParams queries the Model by id without including workspace_id, so the path-workspace authorization check is bypassed at the object layer. Limiting factors: no unauthenticated access (PR:L), impact confined to reading/overwriting model_params_form and thereby the defaults of workflows consuming that model, and practical exploitation depends on a multi-workspace/multi-tenant deployment and the attacker learning or guessing a victim model_id. No fixed version is available, so the only mitigations are access restriction and workspace isolation.

Impact

This is a genuine but bounded-severity issue best treated as a moderate-priority patch-when-available item rather than an emergency. The CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L, 7.4) is network-reachable and low-complexity, but crucially requires PR:L - the attacker must already hold an authenticated MaxKB account with model-read permission in a workspace they control. The scope change (S:C) and the split Low confidentiality/integrity/availability impacts correctly capture that the damage crosses a workspace boundary yet is limited to a single object type (model_params_form) rather than full compromise. No EPSS score, no CISA KEV listing, and no public POC were provided, so there is no signal of active or automated exploitation; the elevated 7.4 is driven by the scope change, not by real-world weaponization. The realistic risk is targeted tampering by an insider or a low-privilege tenant in a multi-workspace deployment, not mass exploitation. Note the input Tag 'Authentication Bypass' conflicts with the described mechanism - this is a cross-workspace authorization/IDOR flaw (CWE-639), not an authentication bypass, since the attacker is fully authenticated. No fixed version exists at time of review, which raises exposure duration but does not change the gated, insider-leaning threat profile.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

A tenant with a legitimate low-privilege MaxKB account and model-read permission in their own (attacker-controlled) workspace enumerates or learns a victim model_id belonging to a different workspace. They issue a model parameter form request supplying that foreign model_id; because ModelSerializer.ModelParams loads and saves the Model by id alone without scoping to workspace_id, they read or overwrite the victim's model_params_form, silently altering defaults used by the victim's workflows. No public exploit code was identified at time of analysis.

This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
No patch listed yet 0.2% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Sep 21, 2026

Cross-workspace read and modification of model parameter defaults in MaxKB 2.10.3-lts and earlier is possible for an authenticated user who holds model-read permission in a workspace they control, simply by supplying a model_id that belongs to a victim workspace. The model parameter form route checks authorization against the workspace in the URL path, but the underlying ModelSerializer.ModelParams fetches the Model by id alone without filtering on workspace_id, so the object-level check is bypassed (CWE-639, CVSS 3.1 base 7.4, AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L). Impact is bounded: it is limited to reading or overwriting the victim's model_params_form, which can indirectly alter the default behavior of workflows that consume that model, and practical exploitation requires a multi-tenant deployment plus knowledge or guessing of a valid victim model_id; no public exploit identified at time of analysis and no fixed version is available as of this review.

RemediationAI

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis; MaxKB 2.10.3-lts and earlier remain affected and the upstream advisory GHSA-g888-8cvh-9284 should be monitored for a fixed release. The single most effective compensating control is to eliminate the multi-workspace trust gap: if the deployment does not genuinely require cross-tenant workspace separation, collapse all users into one workspace, which removes the authorization boundary the bug crosses. Where multi-tenancy is required, run separate MaxKB instances per tenant so that no user can hold credentials in more than one workspace, accepting the added operational and infrastructure overhead. Narrowly restrict the model-read (and model-write) permissions granted to non-administrative accounts, since the attack requires that permission plus a known victim model_id, and pair this with auditing and comparison of model_params_form values across workspaces to detect tampering with workflow defaults. As an interim network control, place the model parameter form route behind a reverse-proxy rule that permits access only from trusted administrative networks or internal service accounts, with the trade-off that legitimate users outside those ranges lose the ability to view or edit model parameters. Finally, treat model_id values as sensitive internal identifiers and avoid exposing them in UI responses or logs, which raises the effort needed to target a specific victim object, though this is obfuscation rather than a fix.

Affected VersionsENISA

MaxKB ≤ 2.10.3-lts

Affected Packages

euvd maxkb no fix

Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)

Affects your stack

Affects 1 package in euvd

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Technical ContextAI · show details

The flaw is an authorization bypass through a user-controlled key (CWE-639), a class that maps to an insecure direct object reference at the data-access layer rather than the routing layer. MaxKB is a 1Panel-dev open-source AI assistant platform whose API is built on Django REST Framework serializers; the affected route is the model parameter form endpoint, and the offending component is ModelSerializer.ModelParams. The route-level permission check correctly authorizes the workspace value carried in the request path, but the serializer then loads (and on save, writes) the Model instance using only the supplied model_id, without AND-ing workspace_id into the query. Because the two checks are performed against different identifiers - path workspace versus object id - an attacker who is legitimately a member of one workspace can address objects that live in another. The CVSS scope change (S:C) reflects that the bypass crosses the intended authorization boundary between tenants. Multi-workspace or multi-tenant deployments are the prerequisite environment, and the impact is confined to the model_params_form field and, transitively, to workflow defaults derived from it. The CPE record cpe:2.3:a:1panel-dev:maxkb:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* indicates the vendor's product line is affected across the version range up to and including 2.10.3-lts, with no fixed release documented at this time.

Know when Maxkb gets its next vulnerability

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (GitHub_M) PRIMARY 7.4 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
vuln.today AI 7.4 HIGH

Network-reachable authenticated user (PR:L) exploits missing workspace scoping; the workspace-boundary crossing gives S:C, with limited read/overwrite of one object yielding C/I/A:L.

3.1 AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
4.0 AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N

Primary rating from Vendor (GitHub_M).

CVSS VectorVendor: GitHub_M

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
Low
User Interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

DescriptionCVE.org

MaxKB is an open-source AI assistant for enterprise. In version 2.10.3-lts and earlier, the model parameter form route authorizes the path workspace but ModelSerializer.ModelParams loads and saves a Model by id alone without including workspace_id in the query. An authenticated user with model read permission in an attacker-controlled workspace can supply a known victim model_id to read or overwrite the victim's model_params_form in another workspace, potentially altering workflows that use those defaults. No fixed version is available as of this review.

Technical POC Analysis

PoC status: no runnable exploit script is included in the evidence.

Full technical POC analysis - root cause, step-by-step exploitation and patch breakdown - is part of the Pro and Business plans.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

MaxKB 2.10.3-lts and earlier contains an authenticated cross-workspace vulnerability that could allow a user in one workspace to read or alter model parameter defaults belonging to another workspace, potentially disrupting automated workflows that depend on those models. While exploitation requires a multi-tenant deployment and knowledge of a valid victim model identifier, the flaw undermines tenant isolation and could erode customer trust in shared environments. Leadership should prioritize mitigation because no vendor patch is currently available.

Business Impact: High
Compensating Controls

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations include restricting model-read permissions to trusted users, enforcing strict tenant isolation at the network and application layers, monitoring logs for cross-workspace model_id queries, and disabling cross-workspace model sharing until a patch is released.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.2%
Top 91% exploitable
Prevalence
Low
niche self-hosted open-source enterprise AI assistant, limited production footprint
Data Quality
6 sources
Confidence: High

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.2%
Patch available No
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
No
Human Impact
High
Technical Impact
Partial

Priority Score

37
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +37
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

More in Maxkb

View all
CVE-2025-48950 HIGH POC
8.8 Jun 03

MaxKB prior to version 1.10.8-lts contains an incomplete sandbox implementation that only blacklists binary execution in

CVE-2026-77521 CRITICAL
10.0 Sep 21

Command injection in MaxKB before 2.10.5-lts allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary shell commands

CVE-2025-66419 CRITICAL
10.0 Dec 11

Sandbox escape and privilege escalation in MaxKB 2.3.1 and earlier allow an attacker who can submit or trigger custom Py

CVE-2026-56779 MEDIUM POC
5.3 Jun 25

Server-side request forgery in MaxKB before 2.10.0 allows any authenticated user holding the default workspace USER role

CVE-2026-79916 CRITICAL
9.1 Sep 21

Authenticated workspace members on MaxKB deployments prior to 2.10.5-lts can escalate to root-level command execution by

CVE-2025-64511 HIGH
8.8 Nov 13

Server-side request forgery in MaxKB (open-source AI assistant from 1Panel-dev) allows an authenticated user with permis

CVE-2026-54149 HIGH
8.8 Jul 10

OS command injection in MaxKB (1Panel-dev's open-source enterprise AI assistant) before 2.10.0-lts lets an authenticated

CVE-2025-66446 HIGH
7.5 Dec 11

Privilege escalation in MaxKB 2.3.1 and earlier allows an authenticated, low-privileged user to overwrite the built-in d

CVE-2026-44847 HIGH
7.5 May 26

Authentication bypass in MaxKB (1Panel-dev) versions prior to 2.9.0 allows remote unauthenticated attackers to invoke we

CVE-2026-39423 MEDIUM
6.9 Apr 14

Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Eval Injection in MaxKB's Markdown rendering engine allows authenticated users to

CVE-2026-39422 MEDIUM
6.9 Apr 14

Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in MaxKB 2.7.1 and below allows authenticated users to inject malicious JavaScript thr

CVE-2026-45413 MEDIUM
6.9 May 26

MaxKB, an open-source enterprise AI assistant by 1Panel-dev, stores user passwords as unsalted MD5 hashes, exposing all

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy