Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

praisonai-platform: list_issue_activity returns activity log for any issue regardless of workspace ownershipGHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj

MEDIUM

GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) CWE-639 vulnerability in praisonai-platform. A fix is available for praisonai-platform — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-47408PYSEC-2026-2927
Published
Updated
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Oct 10, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

  • CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs32th percentile — riskier than 32% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.30%0.60%0.90%0.2%0.4%0.4%0.4%Aug 26Oct 26Oct 26

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 385,386 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍praisonai-platform

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

Type: Insecure Direct Object Reference. The GET /workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id}/activity endpoint is gated by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) and dispatches to ActivityService.list_for_issue(issue_id), which executes SELECT * FROM activity WHERE issue_id = :issue_id with no workspace constraint. A user who is a member of any workspace can read the full activity log of any issue across the entire multi-tenant deployment. File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/activity.py, lines 32-43; services/activity_service.py's list_for_issue method.

Root cause: the route extracts workspace_id from the URL path, uses it solely for the membership gate, then passes the URL-supplied issue_id directly to ActivityService.list_for_issue(issue_id) without verifying which workspace the issue belongs to. The companion list_workspace_activity endpoint at line 19-29 is implemented correctly (it passes workspace_id to svc.list_for_workspace(workspace_id)) — the asymmetry is the smoking gun.

Affected Code

File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/activity.py, lines 19-43.

@router.get("/activity", response_model=List[ActivityLogResponse])
async def list_workspace_activity(
    workspace_id: str,
    limit: int = Query(50, ge=1, le=200),
    offset: int = Query(0, ge=0),
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    svc = ActivityService(session)
    logs = await svc.list_for_workspace(workspace_id, limit=limit, offset=offset)  # correct: passes workspace_id
    return [ActivityLogResponse.model_validate(log) for log in logs]


@router.get("/issues/{issue_id}/activity", response_model=List[ActivityLogResponse])
async def list_issue_activity(
    workspace_id: str,
    issue_id: str,
    limit: int = Query(50, ge=1, le=200),
    offset: int = Query(0, ge=0),
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    svc = ActivityService(session)
    logs = await svc.list_for_issue(issue_id, limit=limit, offset=offset)  # <-- BUG: no workspace_id
    return [ActivityLogResponse.model_validate(log) for log in logs]

Why it's wrong: activity logs are typically the most sensitive operational record — they include actor identity, action type, entity references, and a free-form details JSON blob that may contain pre-/post-change values for any tracked field. Reading the foreign workspace's activity log gives the attacker a high-fidelity view into who did what when, which is gold for further reconnaissance (cross-workspace member enumeration, foreign issue title disclosure, knowing which projects exist). The same author got list_workspace_activity right by passing workspace_id — the issue-scoped variant is the gap.

Exploit Chain

  1. Attacker is a member of workspace W_attacker and harvests a target issue UUID I_T from any side channel. State: attacker holds I_T.
  2. Attacker sends GET /workspaces/W_attacker/issues/I_T/activity?limit=200 with Authorization: Bearer <attacker_jwt>. State: control flow enters list_issue_activity.
  3. require_workspace_member(W_attacker, attacker) passes. ActivityService.list_for_issue(I_T) runs SELECT * FROM activity WHERE issue_id = 'I_T' ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 200. State: response body is the full activity log for the foreign issue.
  4. The activity entries reveal: every actor (member or agent) who touched the issue, every action (created, updated, commented, status_changed, assignee_changed, project_changed, label_added, dependency_added), and the details JSON blob containing the before/after values of every change. State: the attacker fingerprints the foreign workspace's triage workflow, identifies who works on what, and sees the issue's complete history including any embedded secrets that ever passed through the description or comments.
  5. Final state: with one workspace-member token plus one GET, the attacker reads the full activity timeline of any issue in the multi-tenant deployment given the issue UUIDs.

Security Impact

Severity: sec-moderate. CVSS 6.5: network attack, low complexity, low privileges, no user interaction, scope unchanged, high confidentiality (full activity log including before/after details), no integrity claim (read-only), no availability claim.

Attacker capability: read the activity log of any issue in the deployment given its UUID. Combined with the companion issue-IDOR (which already gives full issue content), this is recon for the foreign workspace's operational tempo, member identity, and triage workflow.

Preconditions: praisonai-platform is deployed multi-tenant; attacker has any workspace-membership token; foreign issue UUIDs are reachable.

Differential: source-inspection-verified. The asymmetry between list_workspace_activity (correctly workspace-scoped) and list_issue_activity (no workspace check) confirms the gap. With the suggested fix below, the route first resolves the issue via IssueService.get(workspace_id, issue_id), returns 404 for foreign issues, and only then proceeds.

Suggested Fix

--- a/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/activity.py
+++ b/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/activity.py
@@ -32,9 +32,12 @@
 @router.get("/issues/{issue_id}/activity", response_model=List[ActivityLogResponse])
 async def list_issue_activity(
     workspace_id: str,
     issue_id: str,
     limit: int = Query(50, ge=1, le=200),
     offset: int = Query(0, ge=0),
     user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),
     session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
 ):
+    issue_svc = IssueService(session)
+    if await issue_svc.get(workspace_id, issue_id) is None:    # workspace-scoped get from issue-IDOR companion
+        raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail="Issue not found")
     svc = ActivityService(session)
     logs = await svc.list_for_issue(issue_id, limit=limit, offset=offset)
     return [ActivityLogResponse.model_validate(log) for log in logs]

The same single-key issue lookup pattern is filed separately as the IssueService IDOR; once that is fixed, the helper used here is just IssueService.get(workspace_id, issue_id).

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIpraisonai-platformall versions0.1.4pip install --upgrade 'praisonai-platform==0.1.4'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for praisonai-platform, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update praisonai-platform to 0.1.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary **Type:** Insecure Direct Object Reference. The `GET /workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id}/activity` endpoint is gated by `require_workspace_member(workspace_id)` and dispatches to `ActivityService.list_for_issue(issue_id)`, which executes `SELECT * FROM activity WHERE issue_id = :issue_id` with no workspace constraint. A user who is a member of any workspace can read the full activity log of any issue across the entire multi-tenant deployment. **File:** `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/activity.py`, lines 32-43; `services/activity_service.py`'s `list_fo
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj in your dependencies?

Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.

GHSA-27p4-pjqv-whgj: praisonai-platform — Fixed in 0.1.4