Every CVE Search/ Get API key

CVE-2026-47413

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

9.6 CriticalFix available

PraisonAI Platform is the platform layer for the PraisonAI multi-agent teams system. Versions prior to 0.1.4 have aprivilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. PraisonAI Platform version 0.1.4 patches the issue.

Attack profile

How easy it is to exploit

Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges needed
Low
User interaction
None

What an attacker can affect

Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Exploit likelihood

0.26%Up 0.2 points since Jun 12, 2026
90%50%10%1%

What each source reports

CVE List Score used 9.6

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

PraisonAI Platform is the platform layer for the PraisonAI multi-agent teams system. Versions prior to 0.1.4 have aprivilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. PraisonAI Platform version 0.1.4 patches the issue.

Record
CVE-2026-47413
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-269, CWE-862
Updated
2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-46331 9.6

PraisonAI Platform is the platform layer for the PraisonAI multi-agent teams system. Versions prior to 0.1.4 have aprivilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. PraisonAI Platform version 0.1.4 patches the issue.

Record
EUVD-2026-46331
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Updated
2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-8g2p-pqm3-fcfh 9.6

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

Summary

Type: Privilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101; services/member_service.py, lines 26-38. Root cause: MemberService.add validates only that role is in VALID_ROLES = {"owner", "admin", "member"} — the value, not the caller's right to assign it. The route's Depends(require_workspace_member) resolves to the default min_role="member". So a member-level token plus one POST gives the attacker an alternate identity with owner role inside the same workspace, bypassing every owner-only operation that would otherwise gate them.

Affected Code

File 1: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101.

@router.post("/{workspace_id}/members", response_model=MemberResponse, status_code=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
async def add_member(
    workspace_id: str,
    body: MemberAdd,
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),         # <-- BUG: defaults to min_role="member"
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    member_svc = MemberService(session)
    member = await member_svc.add(workspace_id, body.user_id, body.role)  # <-- writes any (user, role)
    return MemberResponse.model_validate(member)

File 2: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/member_service.py, lines 26-38.

async def add(
    self,
    workspace_id: str,
    user_id: str,
    role: str = "member",
) -> Member:
    """Add a user to a workspace."""
    if role not in VALID_ROLES:                                      # only validates the value
        raise ValueError(f"Invalid role: {role}. Must be one of {VALID_ROLES}")
    member = Member(workspace_id=workspace_id, user_id=user_id, role=role)
    self._session.add(member)                                        # <-- BUG: no caller-permission check
    await self._session.flush()
    return member

Why it's wrong: workspace member management is the textbook capability that must be gated on owner role. The role hierarchy is implemented (MemberService.has_role, member_service.py:80-96), the dependency-tunable min_role parameter exists (require_workspace_member(min_role), deps.py:58), but the POST .../members route uses neither. The VALID_ROLES enum check is purely cosmetic — it accepts "owner" from any caller because the route never asked whether the caller has the right to assign that role.

Exploit Chain

  1. Attacker registers two accounts (or recruits a member account on the target workspace W). Account A is an existing member of W; Account B is a fresh signup the attacker controls (any account on the platform — auth/register is open by default). State: attacker holds tokens for both A and B.
  2. Attacker authenticates as Account A and POSTs Authorization: Bearer <A_jwt> to POST /workspaces/W/members with body {"user_id": "<B_user_id>", "role": "owner"}. State: control flow enters add_member.
  3. require_workspace_member(W, A) passes (A is a member). MemberService.add(W, B, "owner") writes a new row Member(workspace_id=W, user_id=B, role="owner"). State: Account B is now a workspace-W owner.
  4. Attacker switches to Account B and acts as workspace owner — change settings, add/remove members, delete the workspace, or pivot to the companion advisories' primitives. State: attacker holds owner of any workspace they had member access to, via a fresh…
Record
GHSA-8g2p-pqm3-fcfh
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-269, CWE-862
Updated
2026-11-02
NVD 9.6

PraisonAI Platform is the platform layer for the PraisonAI multi-agent teams system. Versions prior to 0.1.4 have aprivilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. PraisonAI Platform version 0.1.4 patches the issue.

Record
CVE-2026-47413
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-269, CWE-862
Updated
2026-11-02
OSV 9.6

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

PraisonAI Platform is the platform layer for the PraisonAI multi-agent teams system. Versions prior to 0.1.4 have aprivilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. PraisonAI Platform version 0.1.4 patches the issue.

Record
CVE-2026-47413
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-269, CWE-862
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-8g2p-pqm3-fcfh 9.6

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

Summary

Type: Privilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101; services/member_service.py, lines 26-38. Root cause: MemberService.add validates only that role is in VALID_ROLES = {"owner", "admin", "member"} — the value, not the caller's right to assign it. The route's Depends(require_workspace_member) resolves to the default min_role="member". So a member-level token plus one POST gives the attacker an alternate identity with owner role inside the same workspace, bypassing every owner-only operation that would otherwise gate them.

Affected Code

File 1: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101.

@router.post("/{workspace_id}/members", response_model=MemberResponse, status_code=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
async def add_member(
    workspace_id: str,
    body: MemberAdd,
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),         # <-- BUG: defaults to min_role="member"
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    member_svc = MemberService(session)
    member = await member_svc.add(workspace_id, body.user_id, body.role)  # <-- writes any (user, role)
    return MemberResponse.model_validate(member)

File 2: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/member_service.py, lines 26-38.

async def add(
    self,
    workspace_id: str,
    user_id: str,
    role: str = "member",
) -> Member:
    """Add a user to a workspace."""
    if role not in VALID_ROLES:                                      # only validates the value
        raise ValueError(f"Invalid role: {role}. Must be one of {VALID_ROLES}")
    member = Member(workspace_id=workspace_id, user_id=user_id, role=role)
    self._session.add(member)                                        # <-- BUG: no caller-permission check
    await self._session.flush()
    return member

Why it's wrong: workspace member management is the textbook capability that must be gated on owner role. The role hierarchy is implemented (MemberService.has_role, member_service.py:80-96), the dependency-tunable min_role parameter exists (require_workspace_member(min_role), deps.py:58), but the POST .../members route uses neither. The VALID_ROLES enum check is purely cosmetic — it accepts "owner" from any caller because the route never asked whether the caller has the right to assign that role.

Exploit Chain

  1. Attacker registers two accounts (or recruits a member account on the target workspace W). Account A is an existing member of W; Account B is a fresh signup the attacker controls (any account on the platform — auth/register is open by default). State: attacker holds tokens for both A and B.
  2. Attacker authenticates as Account A and POSTs Authorization: Bearer <A_jwt> to POST /workspaces/W/members with body {"user_id": "<B_user_id>", "role": "owner"}. State: control flow enters add_member.
  3. require_workspace_member(W, A) passes (A is a member). MemberService.add(W, B, "owner") writes a new row Member(workspace_id=W, user_id=B, role="owner"). State: Account B is now a workspace-W owner.
  4. Attacker switches to Account B and acts as workspace owner — change settings, add/remove members, delete the workspace, or pivot to the companion advisories' primitives. State: attacker holds owner of any workspace they had member access to, via a fresh…
Record
GHSA-8g2p-pqm3-fcfh
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-269, CWE-862
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVPYSEC-2026-480 9.6

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can add arbitrary user as owner via POST /workspaces/{id}/members

Summary

Type: Privilege escalation / cross-tenant member injection. The POST /workspaces/{workspace_id}/members endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member") and forwards the request body's user_id and role straight into MemberService.add(workspace_id, user_id, role), which has no caller-permission check. A user with the lowest workspace privilege can add any user (including a new attacker-controlled second account, or an existing account they want to grief) as owner of the workspace. File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101; services/member_service.py, lines 26-38. Root cause: MemberService.add validates only that role is in VALID_ROLES = {"owner", "admin", "member"} — the value, not the caller's right to assign it. The route's Depends(require_workspace_member) resolves to the default min_role="member". So a member-level token plus one POST gives the attacker an alternate identity with owner role inside the same workspace, bypassing every owner-only operation that would otherwise gate them.

Affected Code

File 1: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 92-101.

@router.post("/{workspace_id}/members", response_model=MemberResponse, status_code=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
async def add_member(
    workspace_id: str,
    body: MemberAdd,
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),         # <-- BUG: defaults to min_role="member"
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    member_svc = MemberService(session)
    member = await member_svc.add(workspace_id, body.user_id, body.role)  # <-- writes any (user, role)
    return MemberResponse.model_validate(member)

File 2: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/member_service.py, lines 26-38.

async def add(
    self,
    workspace_id: str,
    user_id: str,
    role: str = "member",
) -> Member:
    """Add a user to a workspace."""
    if role not in VALID_ROLES:                                      # only validates the value
        raise ValueError(f"Invalid role: {role}. Must be one of {VALID_ROLES}")
    member = Member(workspace_id=workspace_id, user_id=user_id, role=role)
    self._session.add(member)                                        # <-- BUG: no caller-permission check
    await self._session.flush()
    return member

Why it's wrong: workspace member management is the textbook capability that must be gated on owner role. The role hierarchy is implemented (MemberService.has_role, member_service.py:80-96), the dependency-tunable min_role parameter exists (require_workspace_member(min_role), deps.py:58), but the POST .../members route uses neither. The VALID_ROLES enum check is purely cosmetic — it accepts "owner" from any caller because the route never asked whether the caller has the right to assign that role.

Exploit Chain

  1. Attacker registers two accounts (or recruits a member account on the target workspace W). Account A is an existing member of W; Account B is a fresh signup the attacker controls (any account on the platform — auth/register is open by default). State: attacker holds tokens for both A and B.
  2. Attacker authenticates as Account A and POSTs Authorization: Bearer <A_jwt> to POST /workspaces/W/members with body {"user_id": "<B_user_id>", "role": "owner"}. State: control flow enters add_member.
  3. require_workspace_member(W, A) passes (A is a member). MemberService.add(W, B, "owner") writes a new row Member(workspace_id=W, user_id=B, role="owner"). State: Account B is now a workspace-W owner.
  4. Attacker switches to Account B and acts as workspace owner — change settings, add/remove members, delete the workspace, or pivot to the companion advisories' primitives. State: attacker holds owner of any workspace they had member access to, via a fresh…
Record
PYSEC-2026-480
CVSS 3.1
9.6 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected products

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
praisonai-platform
PyPI
before 0.1.4
0.1.4
praisonai-platform
PyPI
before 0.1.4, plus listed versions
0.1.00.1.10.1.20.1.3
0.1.4

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
aliasesEUVD
first indexedCVE List, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV

Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.

In short

CVE-2026-47413 is a critical vulnerability (CVSS 9.6) in Mervinpraison Praisonai-platform, published June 1, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.26%, the 18th percentile. Fixed in praisonai-platform 0.1.4.

References

This page doesn't list everything

Left out here: the rest of 3 source descriptions. The JSON record has them.

MoveEnter Open