Private action arguments can be set by user input on the bulk destroy and bulk update paths in Ash
Key facts
- Attack vector
- Local
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Impact type
- Tampering
- Confidentiality · integrity · availability
- None · High · None
- Fix status
- Fixed
Attack profile from CVSS 4.0 · CNA. Fix status from CNA. Impact type from CWE-915.
Summary
Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes vulnerability in ash-project ash allows a user to set the value of a private action argument on the bulk destroy and bulk update paths. Action arguments declared with public?: false are meant to be set only by trusted server-side code (for example via Ash.Changeset.set_private_argument/3) and must not be settable from end-user input. CVE-2026-55736 fixed the non-bulk changeset path to strip private arguments from user-supplied parameter maps, but the bulk destroy and bulk update paths were not covered. Ash.Actions.Destroy.Bulk.base_changeset/5 and Ash.Actions.Update.Bulk.base_changeset/5 match every key in the caller-supplied parameter map against all of the action's arguments with no public? check, then apply the matches to the base changeset. A caller who can submit parameters to a bulk destroy or bulk update action (for example through AshJsonApi, AshGraphql, or a controller that forwards request parameters to Ash.bulk_destroy/4 or Ash.bulk_update/4) can therefore set any private argument of that action, including one referenced by an arg(...) template in the action's changes or validations. Depending on how the application uses the argument (for example an acting_user_id driving authorization or record ownership, or audit metadata), this can lead to an integrity violation or privilege escalation. The fix requires public? in the argument matching on both bulk paths; private arguments remain settable server-side via the :private_arguments option. This issue affects ash: from 2.17.15 before 3.33.11.
Why it matters now
SSVC decision points
CISA ADP · SSVC 2.0.3
- Exploitation
- None
- Automatable
- No
- Technical impact
- Partial
The decision (Track, Attend, Act) also depends on your mission and well-being impact; see CISA's SSVC guide.
Affected products
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ash-project | ash | 2.17.15 to before 3.33.11 | 3.33.11 | Patch available | CNA |
- ash Vendorash-project Affected 2.17.15 to before 3.33.11 Fixed in 3.33.11 Patch available CNA
CPE names CNA · 1
| CPE | Versions | Role | Vendor |
|---|---|---|---|
| cpe:2.3:a:ash-project:ash:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | — | — | — |
- cpe:2.3:a:ash-project:ash:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* Versions — — ·—
Remediation
- Fix · CNA ash (ash-project) Fixed in 3.33.11
Timeline
- 2026-10-02 Threatist record created from CVE-2026-93477
References
More ash-project vulnerabilities
- TI-2026-56298 Query-complexity limit bypass via first/last pagination arguments in AshGraphql enables denial of service CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.7
- TI-2026-52572 Unbounded atom creation from client-supplied RPC field names in AshTypescript field formatter CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.7
- TI-2026-57010 Path traversal in AshAdmin file uploads via unsanitized client filename CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.3
- TI-2026-26840 Ash Framework: Ash.Type.Module.cast_input/2 atom exhaustion via unchecked Module.concat allows BEAM VM crash CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.2
- TI-2026-54252 EEx template evaluation of prompt content in AshAi enables remote code execution CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.9
- TI-2026-54208 Stored XSS in AshAdmin relationship typeahead via unescaped label_field content CVSS 4.0HIGH 8.4
Sources
This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD. Sources and licences