CVE-2025-46720 (GCVE-0-2025-46720)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-05-05 18:53 – Updated: 2025-05-05 19:00
VLAI?
Summary
Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don't use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely.
Severity ?
3.1 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CWE
  • CWE-203 - Observable Discrepancy
  • CWE-200 - Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
keystonejs keystone Affected: < 6.5.0
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2025-46720",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-05-05T18:59:54.605898Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-05-05T19:00:01.531Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "keystone",
          "vendor": "keystonejs",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 6.5.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don\u0027t use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 3.1,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "integrityImpact": "NONE",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-203",
              "description": "CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-200",
              "description": "CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Keystone has an unintended `isFilterable` bypass that can be used as an oracle to match hidden fields"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-46720",
    "datePublished": "2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-04-28T20:56:09.084Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-05-05T19:00:01.531Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2025-46720\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2025-05-05T19:15:57.330\",\"lastModified\":\"2025-09-19T19:53:56.810\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don\u0027t use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely.\"},{\"lang\":\"es\",\"value\":\"Keystone es un sistema de gesti\u00f3n de contenido para Node.js. Antes de la versi\u00f3n 6.5.0, el control de acceso `{field}.isFilterable` se pod\u00eda omitir en las mutaciones `update` y `delete` a\u00f1adiendo filtros \u00fanicos adicionales. Estos filtros se pueden usar como un or\u00e1culo para sondear la existencia o el valor de campos que de otro modo ser\u00edan ilegibles. Espec\u00edficamente, cuando una mutaci\u00f3n incluye una cl\u00e1usula `where` con m\u00faltiples filtros \u00fanicos (p. ej., `id` y `email`), Keystone intentar\u00e1 encontrar coincidencias en los registros incluso si el filtrado por estos \u00faltimos campos normalmente ser\u00eda rechazado por `field.isFilterable` o `list.defaultIsFilterable`. Esto puede permitir que actores maliciosos infieran la presencia de un valor de campo espec\u00edfico cuando un filtro devuelve un resultado correctamente. Esto afecta a cualquier proyecto que dependa del comportamiento predeterminado o din\u00e1mico de `isFilterable` (a nivel de lista o campo) para evitar que usuarios externos utilicen el filtrado de campos como mecanismo de descubrimiento. Aunque este control de acceso se respeta durante las operaciones `findMany`, no se aplic\u00f3 completamente durante las mutaciones `update` y `delete` al aceptar m\u00e1s de un valor `where` \u00fanico en los filtros. Esto no tiene impacto en los proyectos que usan `isFilterable: false` o `defaultIsFilterable: false` para campos sensibles, o para aquellos que de otra manera han omitido el filtrado por estos campos de su esquema GraphQL. Este problema se ha corregido en `@keystone-6/core` versi\u00f3n 6.5.0. Para mitigar este problema en versiones anteriores donde la aplicaci\u00f3n de parches no es una ruta viable, configure `isFilterable: false` est\u00e1ticamente para los campos relevantes para evitar el filtrado por ellos anteriormente en el flujo de trabajo de control de acceso (es decir, no use funciones); configure `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` para los campos relevantes, lo que impl\u00edcitamente elimina el filtrado por estos campos del esquema GraphQL; y/o deniegue las operaciones `update` y `delete` para las listas relevantes por completo.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":3.1,\"baseSeverity\":\"LOW\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"LOW\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":1.6,\"impactScore\":1.4},{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N\",\"baseScore\":4.3,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"integrityImpact\":\"LOW\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":2.8,\"impactScore\":1.4}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-200\"},{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-203\"}]},{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"NVD-CWE-noinfo\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:keystonejs:keystone:*:*:*:*:*:node.js:*:*\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"6.5.0\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"0B4DF7B9-1E5D-42D3-B2DF-D983ED7EB582\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Vendor Advisory\",\"Mitigation\"]}]}}",
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2025-46720\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2025-05-05T18:59:54.605898Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-05-05T18:59:57.570Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Keystone has an unintended `isFilterable` bypass that can be used as an oracle to match hidden fields\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 3.1, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"LOW\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N\", \"integrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"LOW\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"LOW\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"keystonejs\", \"product\": \"keystone\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"\u003c 6.5.0\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don\u0027t use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-203\", \"description\": \"CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy\"}]}, {\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-200\", \"description\": \"CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2025-46720\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-05-05T19:00:01.531Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2025-04-28T20:56:09.084Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.1"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

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.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.