GHSA-X4VH-J75G-268G

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-02 19:53 – Updated: 2026-03-02 19:53
VLAI
Summary
NocoDB's Refresh Tokens Not Revoked on Password Reset
Details

Summary

The password reset flow did not revoke existing refresh tokens, allowing an attacker with a previously stolen refresh token to continue minting valid JWTs after the victim resets their password.

Details

passwordReset() in users.service.ts updated token_version (invalidating JWTs) but did not call UserRefreshToken.deleteAllUserToken(). The refreshToken() method only checked token existence, not token_version. Both passwordChange() and signOut() correctly deleted all refresh tokens.

Impact

An attacker who previously obtained a refresh token retains access after password reset until the token expires.

Credit

This issue was reported by @bugbunny-research (bugbunny.ai).

Severity
4.9 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.301.2"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "nocodb"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.301.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-28396"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-613"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-02T19:53:17Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-02T17:16:34Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nThe password reset flow did not revoke existing refresh tokens, allowing an attacker with a previously stolen refresh token to continue minting valid JWTs after the victim resets their password.\n\n### Details\n`passwordReset()` in `users.service.ts` updated `token_version` (invalidating JWTs) but did not call `UserRefreshToken.deleteAllUserToken()`. The `refreshToken()` method only checked token existence, not `token_version`. Both `passwordChange()` and `signOut()` correctly deleted all refresh tokens.\n\n### Impact\nAn attacker who previously obtained a refresh token retains access after password reset until the token expires.\n\n### Credit\nThis issue was reported by [@bugbunny-research](https://github.com/bugbunny-research) (bugbunny.ai).",
  "id": "GHSA-x4vh-j75g-268g",
  "modified": "2026-03-02T19:53:17Z",
  "published": "2026-03-02T19:53:17Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb/security/advisories/GHSA-x4vh-j75g-268g"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28396"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb/releases/tag/0.301.3"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "NocoDB\u0027s Refresh Tokens Not Revoked on Password Reset"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





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.



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.