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

GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627

HIGH

GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.1) Improper Privilege Management vulnerability in praisonai-platform. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627 is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

praisonai-platform: Any workspace member can delete the entire workspace via DELETE /workspaces/{id}

Also known asCVE-2026-47412PYSEC-2026-2934
Published
Jun 1, 2026
Updated
Jul 13, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Aug 20, 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-g8rr-7rj2-f627.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs21th percentile — riskier than 21% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.26%0.52%0.78%0.3%0.3%Aug 26Aug 26

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-g8rr-7rj2-f627 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 366,298 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

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: Authorization bypass enabling destructive action. The DELETE /workspaces/{workspace_id} endpoint is gated only by require_workspace_member(workspace_id) (default min_role="member"). Any member of the workspace can issue a single DELETE to wipe the entire workspace, including every project, issue, comment, agent, label, and member record (cascading via the foreign-key relationships). There is no owner-role gate, no confirmation token, no soft-delete window, no recovery path. File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 77-86; services/workspace_service.py's delete() method. Root cause: the route uses Depends(require_workspace_member) which defaults to min_role="member" and is never overridden. The service method WorkspaceService.delete(workspace_id) performs the destructive operation without any caller-permission verification. The role hierarchy (MemberService.has_role, member_service.py:80-96) is implemented but unused for this endpoint.

Affected Code

File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py, lines 77-86.

@router.delete("/{workspace_id}", status_code=status.HTTP_204_NO_CONTENT)
async def delete_workspace(
    workspace_id: str,
    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),         # <-- BUG: defaults to min_role="member"
    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
):
    ws_svc = WorkspaceService(session)
    deleted = await ws_svc.delete(workspace_id)                     # <-- destructive, no role check
    if not deleted:
        raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail="Workspace not found")

Why it's wrong: workspace deletion is the most destructive single action in this product — it wipes every member, project, issue, comment, agent, and label belonging to the tenant. The standard convention is to gate this on owner role, ideally with a confirmation parameter (typed workspace name) and a recovery window. This endpoint does none of that. The require_workspace_member(min_role) parameter exists precisely for this kind of tightening but is never invoked with anything other than the default.

Exploit Chain

  1. Attacker is a member of workspace W (joined via invite, signup default, or any other route into membership). State: attacker holds JWT with Member(workspace_id=W, user_id=attacker, role="member").
  2. Attacker sends DELETE /workspaces/W with Authorization: Bearer <attacker_jwt>. State: control flow enters delete_workspace.
  3. require_workspace_member(W, attacker) passes (attacker is a member, default min_role="member" satisfied). WorkspaceService.delete(W) removes the workspace row; SQLAlchemy cascade rules drop every related row (members, projects, issues, comments, agents, labels). State: workspace W no longer exists.
  4. Final state: a low-privilege member has wiped the workspace. The legitimate owner has no recovery: no soft-delete, no audit-trail event for the deletion (the Activity log row would have been deleted too as part of the cascade). The same primitive at scale (script that DELETEs every workspace_id the attacker can enumerate) becomes a multi-tenant griefing tool.

Security Impact

Severity: sec-high. CVSS 8.1: network attack, low complexity, low privileges, no user interaction, scope unchanged, no confidentiality (just destruction), high integrity (every workspace child row wiped), high availability (workspace gone for legitimate owner). Attacker capability: with one workspace-member token plus one DELETE request, the attacker irreversibly deletes the workspace and every child resource. The deletion is silent and immediate. Preconditions: praisonai-platform is deployed multi-tenant; the attacker has any membership token in the target workspace. Differential: source-inspection-verified. The asymmetry between require_workspace_member's clearly-tunable min_role parameter and this endpoint's use of the default value confirms the gap. With the suggested fix below, member-tier tokens fail the gate at the dependency, the destructive action never reaches the service layer, and the endpoint returns 403 instead of 204.

Suggested Fix

--- a/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py
+++ b/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py
@@ -75,11 +75,15 @@
+def _require_workspace_owner(workspace_id: str, user, session):
+    return require_workspace_member(workspace_id, user, session, min_role="owner")
+
 @router.delete("/{workspace_id}", status_code=status.HTTP_204_NO_CONTENT)
 async def delete_workspace(
     workspace_id: str,
-    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),
+    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(_require_workspace_owner),
     session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
 ):
     ws_svc = WorkspaceService(session)
     deleted = await ws_svc.delete(workspace_id)
     if not deleted:
         raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail="Workspace not found")

Defence-in-depth: require a typed-confirmation parameter (e.g. body {"confirm_name": "<workspace_name>"}) and implement a 30-day soft-delete with restore. The four companion workspace-mutation endpoints (update_workspace, add_member, update_member_role, remove_member) exhibit the same default-min-role gap and are filed as their own advisories.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIpraisonai-platformall versions0.1.4

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. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  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-g8rr-7rj2-f627 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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627 is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary **Type:** Authorization bypass enabling destructive action. The `DELETE /workspaces/{workspace_id}` endpoint is gated only by `require_workspace_member(workspace_id)` (default `min_role="member"`). Any member of the workspace can issue a single DELETE to wipe the entire workspace, including every project, issue, comment, agent, label, and member record (cascading via the foreign-key relationships). There is no owner-role gate, no confirmation token, no soft-delete window, no recovery path. **File:** `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/workspaces.py`, lines 77-86;
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627 in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627 across PyPI dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-g8rr-7rj2-f627: praisonai-platform (High… | O3 Security