ash-project ash_sql up to 0.7.0 AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries? improper authorization
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | $0-$5k | 0.52+ |
Summary
A vulnerability identified as problematic has been detected in ash-project ash_sql up to 0.7.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?. The manipulation leads to improper authorization.
This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2026-81316. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.
Details
A vulnerability was found in ash-project ash_sql up to 0.7.0. It has been rated as problematic. This issue affects the function AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a improper authorization vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-285. The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action. Impacted is confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:
Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to receive an aggregate value computed over rows a more restrictive filter should have excluded, disclosing counts, sums, or lists across an authorization or tenancy boundary. AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?/2 reports two aggregate queries as different only when their filter and their sort both differ. Aggregate queries rarely carry a sort, so two aggregates that share a name but carry entirely different filters compare as identical. The colliding aggregate keeps its name and is treated as already computed, and select_aggregates returns the first-registered variant's value. The same name reaches the builder twice with different filters when actor or tenant context is stamped into each aggregate's query, so a narrowly filtered aggregate can be served the value of a previously registered broad one. This issue affects ash_sql: from 0.1.0 before 0.7.1.
The advisory is shared at github.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2026-81316 since 08/30/2026. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1548.002 for this issue.
Upgrading to version 0.7.1 eliminates this vulnerability.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
Website
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA CVSS-B Score: 🔒
CNA CVSS-BT Score: 🔒
CNA Vector: 🔒
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.1
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.1
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Improper authorizationCWE: CWE-285 / CWE-266
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔒
Upgrade: ash_sql 0.7.1
Timeline
08/30/2026 Advisory disclosed08/30/2026 CVE reserved
08/30/2026 VulDB entry created
08/30/2026 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Product: github.comAdvisory: github.com
Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2026-81316 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-81316
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-397133
Entry
Created: 08/30/2026 14:22Changes: 08/30/2026 14:22 (68)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.