CVE-2026-73303

highpriority · track · 0EPSS 0.003 · 22 %ileEUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.31% (22nd) EPSS
CVSS 8.2 · high
Is it mine?
2 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
3 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv

EPSS · scored 2026-10-22

Budibase is an open-source low-code platform. Prior to 3.40.0, POST /api/v2/email on account.budibase.app accepted a client-controlled accountId without binding it to the authenticated session, while checking only currentEmail. An authenticated attacker who obtains a victim account identifier can start the email-change workflow for the victim, receive and submit the verification code through POST /api/v2/email/verification, move the victim email to an attacker-controlled address, and complete a password reset as the victim. This issue is fixed in version 3.40.0.

01

cvss

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

8.2
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode

v3.18.2highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.18.2highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:Nsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 1.8 · impact 5.8
v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

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

Exploitation: none · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: totalcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (2)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (1)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-c8vc-7pv3-g98p Budibase: Email Change IDOR via POST /api/v2/email allows full Account Takeover (accountId not validated against session)2026-07-24ghsa · osvUS

    ## Summary `POST /api/v2/email` on the account portal (`account.budibase.app`) starts an email-change workflow using a client-supplied `accountId` that is **not validated against the authenticated session**. A logged-in attacker supplies a victim's `accountId` and an email address they control; the verification code is delivered to the attacker's address, and completing the workflow changes the **victim's** account email. The attacker then password-resets the victim's account through the controlled address and logs in — full account takeover with no victim interaction. ## Vulnerability Details The endpoint session-checks the `currentEmail` field (a mismatch returns 403), but it does not enforce `body.accountId === session.accountId`. The account-portal frontend only ever submits the logged-in user's own accountId, so in normal use the two always match — the server simply trusts the body value. An attacker who has a victim's `accountId` can point the workflow at the victim's account while passing their own `currentEmail` to clear the session check. This is more powerful than a direct password reset: `PUT /api/v2/auth/password {email}` already exists and is gated only on knowing the victim's email, but the reset link is sent to the address on the account — the victim's inbox, which the attacker does not control. This IDOR moves the victim's email to an attacker-controlled inbox first, so the attacker receives the reset link and sets a password they know. **accountId obtainability.** We checked every endpoint reachable from a non-admin free-tier account — `GET /api/global/users` (no UUID in any user record), `GET /api/global/auditlogs/search` (no accountId field), `GET /api/global/users/invites` (code + email + name only), `GET /api/v2/tenant` (one tenant-internal UUID, not a user accountId), the account-portal frontend (passes the session's own accountId only), and all unauthenticated endpoints — and the victim's `accountId` was not present in any of them. The attacker must obtain the UUID through some channel other than the normal API surface (support channel, screenshot, a leak, prior compromise, etc.). ## Steps to Reproduce **Setup:** Two account-portal accounts at `https://account.budibase.app` — Account A (attacker) and Account B (victim). From Account B's session, `GET /api/auth/self` returns `account.accountId` — this is the value the attacker needs. 1. **Start the email-change workflow pointed at the victim's accountId, newEmail = attacker-controlled.** ```http POST /api/v2/email HTTP/1.1 Host: account.budibase.app Content-Type: application/json Cookie: budibase:auth=<ACCOUNT_A_JWT> {"currentEmail":"<ACCOUNT_A_EMAIL>","newEmail":"attacker-controlled@example.net","accountId":"<VICTIM_ACCOUNT_ID>"} ``` Response: `201 Created`, sets `budibase:change_email:correlationkey` (HttpOnly), `:instancekey`, `:status`, `:newemail` cookies. The workflow started against the victim's accountId even though the caller is Account A. 2. **Complete the change with the code from the attacker-controlled inbox (or read directly from the `correlationkey` cookie set in step 1).** ```http POST /api/v2/email/verification HTTP/1.1 Host: account.budibase.app Content-Type: application/json Cookie: budibase:auth=<ACCOUNT_A_JWT>; budibase:change_email:correlationkey=<CODE>; budibase:change_email:instancekey=<KEY> {"verificationCode":"<code>","processInstanceKey":"<key>"} ``` Response: `200 OK`. The victim's account email is now `attacker-controlled@example.net`. 3. **Confirm the change hit the victim, not the caller (false-positive control).** - Account A (caller) still logs in with its own original email — 200, unchanged. - Account B's (victim) original email is now rejected — 403, locked out. - `attacker-controlled@example.net` now logs into the victim's account — 200. 4. **Take over the account.** ```http PUT /api/v2/auth/password HTTP/1.1 Host: account.budibase.app Content-Type: application/json {"email":"attacker-controlled@example.net"} ``` Response: `202 Accepted`, reset link delivered to the attacker's own inbox. Complete the reset with `PUT /api/v2/auth/password/verification`, then log in as the victim with the attacker-chosen password. `GET /api/auth/self` afterward returns the victim's real `accountId` and `tenantId` — full account takeover, confirmed via a genuinely separate account/tenant (not a same-account self-test). ## Impact An authenticated account-portal user who obtains a victim's `accountId` (out-of-band — it is not exposed anywhere in the normal cross-user API surface we could find) can take over that victim's account: rewrite the login email to an attacker address, set a new password, and access the victim's tenants, apps, and stored datasource credentials (REST/SQL/S3 auth). The victim is locked out of their own account. Every step from the initial IDOR write to full login-as-victim is deterministic and 100% reliable once the accountId is known — no additional vulnerability or guessing is required, since the chain uses nothing but the platform's own stock password-reset flow. ## Remediation Validate that the body's `accountId` equals the authenticated session's `accountId` before starting or completing the email-change workflow (the same check already applied to `currentEmail`). Do not trust a client-supplied `accountId` to select the workflow target.

06

also known as (2)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-08-12modified 2026-09-08
08

references (6)

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