ghsa-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-11-21 18:06
Modified
2025-11-27 07:52
Summary
SpiceDB: LookupResources with Multiple Entrypoints across Different Definitions Can Return Incomplete Results
Details

Impact

If a schema includes the following characteristics:

  1. Permission defined in terms of a union (+)
  2. That union references the same relation on both sides, but one side arrows to a different permission

Then you might have missing LookupResources results when checking the permission. This only affects LookupResources; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly.

A small concrete example:

relation doer_of_things: user | group#member permission do_the_thing = doer_of_things + doer_of_things->admin

A CheckPermission on do_the_thing will return the correct permissionship, but a LookupResources on do_the_thing may miss resources.

A Comprehensive Example

If you have a schema with a structure like this:

``` definition special_user {}

definition user { relation special_user_mapping: special_user permission special_user = special_user_mapping } definition group { relation member: user permission membership = member + member->special_user }

definition system { relation viewer: user | group#membership // This is the problematic permission permission view = viewer + viewer->special_user } ```

And these relationships: system:somesystem#viewer@group:somegroup#membership group:somegroup#member@user:someuser1 user:someuser1#special_user_mapping@special_user:specialuser

And you call LookupResources with: subject_type: user subject_id: someuser1 permission: view resource_type: system

You would expect to receive system:somesystem in the results, but you do not.

Note that this only applies to LookupResources; if you CheckPermission for that resource specifically, it will return HasPermission.

Patches

The issue is fixed in v1.47.1. Upgrading to this version will remediate this issue.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/authzed/spicedb"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.47.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-65111"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-277"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-11-21T18:06:00Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-11-21T22:16:33Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nIf a schema includes the following characteristics:\n\n1. Permission defined in terms of a union (`+`)\n1. That union references the same relation on both sides, but one side arrows to a different permission\n\nThen you might have missing `LookupResources` results when checking the permission. This only affects `LookupResources`; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly.\n\nA small concrete example:\n\n```\nrelation doer_of_things: user | group#member\npermission do_the_thing = doer_of_things + doer_of_things-\u003eadmin\n```\n\nA CheckPermission on `do_the_thing` will return the correct permissionship, but a LookupResources on `do_the_thing` may miss resources.\n\n#### A Comprehensive Example\n\nIf you have a schema with a structure like this:\n\n```\ndefinition special_user {}\n\ndefinition user {\n  relation special_user_mapping: special_user\n  permission special_user = special_user_mapping\n}\ndefinition group {\n   relation member: user\n   permission membership = member + member-\u003especial_user\n}\n\ndefinition system {\n  relation viewer: user | group#membership\n  // This is the problematic permission\n  permission view = viewer + viewer-\u003especial_user\n}\n```\n\nAnd these relationships:\n```\nsystem:somesystem#viewer@group:somegroup#membership\ngroup:somegroup#member@user:someuser1\nuser:someuser1#special_user_mapping@special_user:specialuser\n```\n\nAnd you call LookupResources with:\n```\nsubject_type: user\nsubject_id: someuser1\npermission: view\nresource_type: system\n```\n\nYou would expect to receive `system:somesystem` in the results, but you do not.\n\nNote that this only applies to `LookupResources`; if you `CheckPermission` for that resource specifically, it will return `HasPermission`.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe issue is fixed in v1.47.1. Upgrading to this version will remediate this issue.",
  "id": "GHSA-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr",
  "modified": "2025-11-27T07:52:30Z",
  "published": "2025-11-21T18:06:00Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/authzed/spicedb/security/advisories/GHSA-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-65111"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/authzed/spicedb/commit/8c2edbe1e7bd3851fa2138f4cc344bfde986dcf2"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/authzed/spicedb"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "SpiceDB: LookupResources with Multiple Entrypoints across Different Definitions Can Return Incomplete Results"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…