CVE-2025-49011

mediumpriority · track · 21EPSS 0.003 · 24 %ileEUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.32% (24th) EPSS
CVSS 5.3 · medium
Is it mine?
3 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

SpiceDB is an open source database for storing and querying fine-grained authorization data. Prior to version 1.44.2, on schemas involving arrows with caveats on the arrow’ed relation, when the path to resolve a CheckPermission request involves the evaluation of multiple caveated branches, requests may return a negative response when a positive response is expected. Version 1.44.2 fixes the issue. As a workaround, do not use caveats in the schema over an arrow’ed relation.

01

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

5.3
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · low–medium · 3.7–5.3

v3.15.3mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 3.9 · impact 1.4
v3.13.7lowCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.13.7lowCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 2.2 · impact 1.4
v3.13.7lowCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · OSV
v3.14.9mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (3)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (2)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-cwwm-hr97-qfxmSpiceDB checks involving relations with caveats can result in no permission when permission is expected2025-06-06ghsa · osvUS

    ### Impact On schemas involving arrows with caveats on the arrow’ed relation, when the path to resolve a CheckPermission request involves the evaluation of multiple caveated branches, requests may return a negative response when a positive response is expected. For example, given this schema: ``` definition user {} definition office { relation parent: office relation manager: user permission read = manager + parent->read } definition group { relation parent: office permission read = parent->read } definition document { relation owner: group with equals permission read = owner->read } caveat equals(actual string, required string) { actual == required } ``` and these relationships: ``` office:headoffice#manager@user:maria office:branch1#parent@office:headoffice group:admins#parent@office:branch1 group:managers#parent@office:headoffice document:budget#owner@group:admins[equals:{"required":"admin"}] document:budget#owner@group:managers[equals:{"required":"manager"}] ``` Permission for `'document:budget#read@user:maria with {"actual" : "admin"}'` is returned as NO_PERMISSION when HAS_PERMISSION is the correct answer. ### Patches Upgrade to v1.44.2. ### Workarounds Do not use caveats in your schema over an arrow’ed relation.

  • GO-2025-3744SpiceDB checks involving relations with caveats can result in no permission when permission is expected in github.com/authzed/spicedb2025-06-10vendor · osvUS

    SpiceDB checks involving relations with caveats can result in no permission when permission is expected in github.com/authzed/spicedb

06

also known as (5)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2025-06-06modified 2026-06-17
08

references (8)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan