Shopware: Admin API ACL Bypass in Order State Transition EndpointsGHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6
MEDIUMGHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) CWE-862 vulnerability in shopware/platform. A fix is available for shopware/platform — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6 by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 390,400 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.
Real-World Exposure
shopware/platform🐘shopware/platform🐘shopware/core🐘shopware/coreReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Packagist packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
This is a vertical authorization bypass in the Admin API affecting order state transition features (/api/_action/order/{orderId}/state/{transition} and similar transaction/delivery transition routes). The root cause is that the transition action routes do not declare required server-side ACL privileges, allowing low-privileged users to pass the authorization boundary. As a result, authenticated users without order:update can still change order states, causing real security impact such as operational integrity loss, automation workflow misuse, and fulfillment/settlement/support process disruption.
Description
Shopware’s permission model requires server-side enforcement independent of UI guards. However, the dedicated order-state transition action endpoints are missing ACL metadata, so accounts without regular order update privileges can still submit transition requests that are processed by the backend. In real reproduction, the same low-privileged account receives 403 on the normal order update API, while the transition action API succeeds with 200 and updates order state in the database. The key point is that reproduction is possible through direct API calls regardless of UI access restrictions or hidden buttons. This is not a functional edge case; it is an implementation gap in authorization boundaries that enables privilege escalation behavior where a “read/limited-edit” user can control order lifecycle states.
Expected Behavior
- Order, order-transaction, and order-delivery transition endpoints must perform explicit server-side ACL checks.
- Requests should be rejected unless the caller has the proper entity update privileges, such as
order:update,order_transaction:update, ororder_delivery:update. - If an account gets 403 on the normal order update API, transition actions on the same protected resource should also be blocked by equivalent policy.
- Even if transition internals use SYSTEM_SCOPE, caller authorization must be validated before entering the transition execution path.
Root Cause
File: src/Core/Checkout/Order/Api/OrderActionController.php
#[Route(
path: '/api/_action/order/{orderId}/state/{transition}',
name: 'api.action.order.state_machine.order.transition_state',
methods: [Request::METHOD_POST]
)]
public function orderStateTransition(
string $orderId,
string $transition,
Request $request,
Context $context
): JsonResponse {
$toPlace = $this->orderService->orderStateTransition(
$orderId,
$transition,
$request->request,
$context
);
return new JsonResponse($toPlace->jsonSerialize());
}
This route exposes state transitions but forwards user-controlled inputs (orderId, transition) into the service layer without PlatformRequest::ATTRIBUTE_ACL and without an explicit context->isAllowed(...) privilege check. An untrusted caller can directly control the transition target.
File: src/Core/Framework/Api/Acl/AclAnnotationValidator.php
$privileges = $request->attributes->get(PlatformRequest::ATTRIBUTE_ACL);
if (!$privileges) {
return;
}
If route ACL metadata is absent, ACL validation exits immediately. Therefore these action routes skip authorization validation entirely.
File: src/Core/System/StateMachine/StateMachineRegistry.php
public function transition(Transition $transition, Context $context): StateMachineStateCollection
{
return $context->scope(Context::SYSTEM_SCOPE, function (Context $context) use ($transition): StateMachineStateCollection {
// ...
$this->stateMachineHistoryRepository->create([$stateMachineHistoryEntity], $context);
$repository->upsert($data, $context);
// ...
});
}
Transitions run in SYSTEM_SCOPE and persist state/history with system context. This requires strict pre-authorization at the route/controller boundary, but that pre-check is missing, so low-privileged calls still lead to real state changes.
Impact
The precondition is a remotely reachable authenticated low-privileged Admin API user (for example, operator/support account, or a compromised restricted account). The attacker only needs a valid order identifier, then calls transition action endpoints to cancel/reopen/advance order states without intended update privileges. This attack remains feasible even when UI access is restricted, because direct API calls still work. As a result, business workflows can be manipulated: order lifecycle integrity is broken, payment/shipping/document/notification/automation flows can be triggered incorrectly, and operational disruption can follow. In realistic scenarios, an attacker with a restricted account can mass-cancel or selectively alter orders, causing customer-support spikes, settlement inconsistencies, fulfillment mistakes, and practical availability degradation of day-to-day operations.
Patch Recommendation
- Add explicit ACL requirements to order/order-transaction/order-delivery transition routes in
OrderActionController, aligned with entity update privileges. - Centralize server-side privilege checks at transition entry points so transition paths and normal update paths follow consistent authorization policy.
- Keep SYSTEM_SCOPE writes strictly behind authorization gates; ensure caller privilege decisions are completed in pre-check logic before transition execution.
- Review transition-related APIs to guarantee privilege model mapping (
order:*,order_transaction:*,order_delivery:*) is consistently enforced and no unprotected route remains.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐘Packagist | shopware/platform | ≥ 6.7.0.0&&< 6.7.10.1 | 6.7.10.1composer require shopware/platform:^6.7.10.1 |
| 🐘Packagist | shopware/platform | all versions | 6.6.10.18composer require shopware/platform:^6.6.10.18 |
| 🐘Packagist | shopware/core | ≥ 6.7.0.0&&< 6.7.10.1 | 6.7.10.1composer require shopware/core:^6.7.10.1 |
| 🐘Packagist | shopware/core | all versions | 6.6.10.18composer require shopware/core:^6.6.10.18 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for shopware/platform, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update shopware/platform to 6.7.10.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Close the privilege gap rather than the entry point: audit which accounts, roles and service identities can reach the affected operation, drop the component to the least privilege it actually needs, and review file and directory permissions created by earlier installs — a default left in place is what makes this reachable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6 in your dependencies?
Find it across Packagist, including transitive dependencies.