GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-G47C-3XMW-Q6M2

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-01 19:24 – Updated: 2026-09-01 19:24
VLAI
Summary
Django REST framework: AdminRenderer may disclose GET-protected data when rendering invalid write requests
Details

Summary

AdminRenderer may disclose data that would normally be protected by GET permissions when rendering a 400 Bad Request response for an invalid write request.

If a view allows POST (or another write method) but denies GET, an invalid request rendered through AdminRenderer can invoke the view's GET handler and include data from the GET representation in the generated HTML response.

This behavior appears to be specific to AdminRenderer and does not affect the normal JSON rendering path.


Details

While investigating the AdminRenderer rendering flow, I observed that invalid write requests are rendered by temporarily overriding the request method and invoking the view's GET handler:

with override_method(view, request, "GET") as request:
    response = view.get(request, *view.args, **view.kwargs)

data = response.data

This execution path differs from a normal GET request.

Under normal request processing, a GET request flows through:

APIView.dispatch()
    └── APIView.initial()
            └── APIView.check_permissions()

However, during AdminRenderer rendering, the renderer directly invokes:

view.get(...)

A view whose permission class explicitly allowed POST but denied GET still executed its GET handler while rendering an invalid POST request through AdminRenderer.

As a result, data intended to be available only through an authorized GET request was included in the generated HTML response.


Proof of Concept

Using a standard ListCreateAPIView.

Permission class:

class ProbePermission(BasePermission):
    def has_permission(self, request, view):
        return request.method == "POST"

View:

class View(ListCreateAPIView):
    renderer_classes = (AdminRenderer, JSONRenderer)
    permission_classes = (ProbePermission,)
    serializer_class = ProbeSerializer

    def get_queryset(self):
        return [
            {
                "name": "visible",
                "secret": "GET-ONLY-SECRET",
            }
        ]

Expected Behaviour

GET request
→ 403 Forbidden

Invalid POST request
→ 400 Bad Request
→ Response should contain only validation errors.
→ GET-only data should not be rendered.

Observed Behaviour

GET request
→ 403 Forbidden

Invalid POST request rendered through AdminRenderer
→ 400 Bad Request
→ HTML response contains:

GET-ONLY-SECRET

Tthe same behavior is shown using a minimal APIView implementation.

Observed results:

minimal.post_400.handler_calls =
[
    ("post", "POST"),
    ("get", "GET")
]

minimal.post_400.contains_secret = True

Generic view reproduction:

generic.direct_get.status = 403
generic.direct_get.contains_secret = False

generic.post_400.status = 400
generic.post_400.contains_secret = True

generic.post_400.permission_calls =
[
    ("GenericAdminView", "POST"),
    ...
    ("GenericAdminView", "OPTIONS")
]

generic.post_400.queryset_calls =
[
    ("GenericAdminView", "GET"),
    ...
]

These observations indicate that direct GET requests are correctly denied, while the simulated GET used during AdminRenderer rendering can still retrieve the protected representation.


Impact

This issue may result in information disclosure when all of the following conditions are met:

AdminRenderer is enabled.

The client negotiates the HTML renderer (for example using Accept: text/html).

The application permits POST (or another write method).

GET requests are denied by the configured permission class.

The invalid write request returns 400 Bad Request.

The GET representation contains information that the requester would normally not be permitted to access.

This issue does not appear to affect:

JSON rendering

Standard API responses

Successful write requests

The behavior appears limited to the HTML rendering path used by AdminRenderer.


Suggested Fix

Possible approaches include:

Perform equivalent permission checks before executing the simulated GET request.

Avoid invoking view.get() when the corresponding GET request would not be permitted.

Fall back to rendering only serializer/form validation errors instead of retrieving the GET representation.

A regression test could create a permission class that allows POST while denying GET, then verify that an invalid POST rendered with AdminRenderer does not include data from the protected GET representation.


Environment

Repository:

encode/django-rest-framework

Branch tested:

security-audit-drf

Commit tested:

cf582fb58e9e5ffcc8ed78a2cb9aaa8f4865666a

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.17.1"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "djangorestframework"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.17.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-73229"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-200"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-09-01T19:24:29Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-11T20:18:48Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Summary\n\nAdminRenderer may disclose data that would normally be protected by GET permissions when rendering a 400 Bad Request response for an invalid write request.\n\nIf a view allows POST (or another write method) but denies GET, an invalid request rendered through AdminRenderer can invoke the view\u0027s GET handler and include data from the GET representation in the generated HTML response.\n\nThis behavior appears to be specific to AdminRenderer and does not affect the normal JSON rendering path.\n\n\n---\n\nDetails\n\nWhile investigating the AdminRenderer rendering flow, I observed that invalid write requests are rendered by temporarily overriding the request method and invoking the view\u0027s GET handler:\n\n```\nwith override_method(view, request, \"GET\") as request:\n    response = view.get(request, *view.args, **view.kwargs)\n\ndata = response.data\n```\n\nThis execution path differs from a normal GET request.\n\nUnder normal request processing, a GET request flows through:\n\n```\nAPIView.dispatch()\n    \u2514\u2500\u2500 APIView.initial()\n            \u2514\u2500\u2500 APIView.check_permissions()\n```\n\nHowever, during AdminRenderer rendering, the renderer directly invokes:\n\nview.get(...)\n\nA view whose permission class explicitly allowed POST but denied GET still executed its GET handler while rendering an invalid POST request through AdminRenderer.\n\nAs a result, data intended to be available only through an authorized GET request was included in the generated HTML response.\n\n\n---\n\nProof of Concept\n\nUsing a standard ListCreateAPIView.\n\nPermission class:\n\n```\nclass ProbePermission(BasePermission):\n    def has_permission(self, request, view):\n        return request.method == \"POST\"\n\nView:\n\nclass View(ListCreateAPIView):\n    renderer_classes = (AdminRenderer, JSONRenderer)\n    permission_classes = (ProbePermission,)\n    serializer_class = ProbeSerializer\n\n    def get_queryset(self):\n        return [\n            {\n                \"name\": \"visible\",\n                \"secret\": \"GET-ONLY-SECRET\",\n            }\n        ]\n```\n\nExpected Behaviour\n\n```\nGET request\n\u2192 403 Forbidden\n\nInvalid POST request\n\u2192 400 Bad Request\n\u2192 Response should contain only validation errors.\n\u2192 GET-only data should not be rendered.\n\n```\nObserved Behaviour\n\n```\nGET request\n\u2192 403 Forbidden\n\nInvalid POST request rendered through AdminRenderer\n\u2192 400 Bad Request\n\u2192 HTML response contains:\n\nGET-ONLY-SECRET\n```\n\nTthe same behavior is shown using a minimal APIView implementation.\n\nObserved results:\n\n```\nminimal.post_400.handler_calls =\n[\n    (\"post\", \"POST\"),\n    (\"get\", \"GET\")\n]\n\nminimal.post_400.contains_secret = True\n```\n\nGeneric view reproduction:\n\n```\ngeneric.direct_get.status = 403\ngeneric.direct_get.contains_secret = False\n\ngeneric.post_400.status = 400\ngeneric.post_400.contains_secret = True\n\ngeneric.post_400.permission_calls =\n[\n    (\"GenericAdminView\", \"POST\"),\n    ...\n    (\"GenericAdminView\", \"OPTIONS\")\n]\n\ngeneric.post_400.queryset_calls =\n[\n    (\"GenericAdminView\", \"GET\"),\n    ...\n]\n```\n\nThese observations indicate that direct GET requests are correctly denied, while the simulated GET used during AdminRenderer rendering can still retrieve the protected representation.\n\n\n---\n\nImpact\n\nThis issue may result in information disclosure when all of the following conditions are met:\n\nAdminRenderer is enabled.\n\nThe client negotiates the HTML renderer (for example using Accept: text/html).\n\nThe application permits POST (or another write method).\n\nGET requests are denied by the configured permission class.\n\nThe invalid write request returns 400 Bad Request.\n\nThe GET representation contains information that the requester would normally not be permitted to access.\n\n\nThis issue does not appear to affect:\n\nJSON rendering\n\nStandard API responses\n\nSuccessful write requests\n\n\nThe behavior appears limited to the HTML rendering path used by AdminRenderer.\n\n\n---\n\nSuggested Fix\n\nPossible approaches include:\n\nPerform equivalent permission checks before executing the simulated GET request.\n\nAvoid invoking view.get() when the corresponding GET request would not be permitted.\n\nFall back to rendering only serializer/form validation errors instead of retrieving the GET representation.\n\n\nA regression test could create a permission class that allows POST while denying GET, then verify that an invalid POST rendered with AdminRenderer does not include data from the protected GET representation.\n\n\n---\n\nEnvironment\n\nRepository:\n\n`encode/django-rest-framework`\n\nBranch tested:\n\n`security-audit-drf`\n\nCommit tested:\n\n`cf582fb58e9e5ffcc8ed78a2cb9aaa8f4865666a`",
  "id": "GHSA-g47c-3xmw-q6m2",
  "modified": "2026-09-01T19:24:29Z",
  "published": "2026-09-01T19:24:29Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/security/advisories/GHSA-g47c-3xmw-q6m2"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-73229"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/pull/10012"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/commit/71f81946906e52f9dc8e5d22a0f3d2afa50c455e"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/commit/9e82afc98acfe6fc28c9bf78147f0c5b3f222cb5"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/releases/tag/3.17.2"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Django REST framework: AdminRenderer may disclose GET-protected data when rendering invalid write requests"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…