{"dataType":"CVE_RECORD","dataVersion":"5.1","cveMetadata":{"cveId":"CVE-2025-46720","assignerOrgId":"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa","state":"PUBLISHED","assignerShortName":"GitHub_M","dateReserved":"2025-04-28T20:56:09.084Z","datePublished":"2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z","dateUpdated":"2025-05-05T19:00:01.531Z"},"containers":{"cna":{"title":"Keystone has an unintended `isFilterable` bypass that can be used as an oracle to match hidden fields","problemTypes":[{"descriptions":[{"cweId":"CWE-203","lang":"en","description":"CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy","type":"CWE"}]},{"descriptions":[{"cweId":"CWE-200","lang":"en","description":"CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor","type":"CWE"}]}],"metrics":[{"cvssV3_1":{"attackComplexity":"HIGH","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"NONE","baseScore":3.1,"baseSeverity":"LOW","confidentialityImpact":"LOW","integrityImpact":"NONE","privilegesRequired":"LOW","scope":"UNCHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N","version":"3.1"}}],"references":[{"name":"https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3","tags":["x_refsource_CONFIRM"],"url":"https://github.com/keystonejs/keystone/security/advisories/GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3"}],"affected":[{"vendor":"keystonejs","product":"keystone","versions":[{"version":"< 6.5.0","status":"affected"}]}],"providerMetadata":{"orgId":"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa","shortName":"GitHub_M","dateUpdated":"2025-05-05T18:53:51.506Z"},"descriptions":[{"lang":"en","value":"Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don't use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely."}],"source":{"advisory":"GHSA-hg9m-67mm-7pg3","discovery":"UNKNOWN"}},"adp":[{"metrics":[{"other":{"type":"ssvc","content":{"timestamp":"2025-05-05T18:59:54.605898Z","id":"CVE-2025-46720","options":[{"Exploitation":"none"},{"Automatable":"no"},{"Technical Impact":"partial"}],"role":"CISA Coordinator","version":"2.0.3"}}}],"title":"CISA ADP Vulnrichment","providerMetadata":{"orgId":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","shortName":"CISA-ADP","dateUpdated":"2025-05-05T19:00:01.531Z"}}]}}