Unauthorized Access to Private Fields in User Registration APIGHSA-gc7p-j5xm-xxh2
HIGHGHSA-gc7p-j5xm-xxh2 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.6) Improper Authentication vulnerability in @strapi/plugin-users-permissions. 1 public exploit or proof-of-concept reference is indexed, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for @strapi/plugin-users-permissions — see the affected versions and patch details below.
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-gc7p-j5xm-xxh2.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
Where this sits among everything scored
Real-World Exposure
How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.
@strapi/plugin-users-permissionsnpm@strapi/strapinpmDescription
System Details
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| OS | Windows 11 |
| Version | 4.11.1 (node v16.14.2) |
| Database | mysql |
Description
I marked some fields as private fields in user content-type, and tried to register as a new user via api, at the same time I added content to fill the private fields and sent a post request, and as you can see from the images below, I can write to the private fields.




To prevent this, I went to the extension area and tried to extend the register method, for this I wanted to do it using the sanitizeInput function that I know in the source codes of the strap. But the sanitizeInput function did not filter out private fields.
const { auth } = ctx.state;
const data = ctx.request.body;
const userSchema = strapi.getModel("plugin::users-permissions.user");
sanitize.contentAPI.input(data, userSchema, { auth });
here's the solution I've temporarily kept to myself, code snippet
const body = ctx.request.body;
const { attributes } = strapi.getModel("plugin::users-permissions.user");
const sanitizedData = _.omitBy(body, (data, key) => {
const attribute = attributes[key];
if (_.isNil(attribute)) {
return false;
}
//? If you want, you can throw an error for fields that we did not expect.
// if (_.isNil(attribute))
// throw new ApplicationError(`Unexpected value ${key}`);
// if private value is true, we do not want to send it to the database.
return attribute.private;
});
return sanitizedData;
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | @strapi/plugin-users-permissions | ≥ 4.0.0&&< 4.13.1 | 4.13.1npm install @strapi/plugin-users-permissions@4.13.1 |
| 📦npm | @strapi/strapi | ≥ 4.0.0&&< 4.13.1 | 4.13.1npm install @strapi/strapi@4.13.1 |
Affected Products
strapistrapiResearch use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @strapi/plugin-users-permissions, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update @strapi/plugin-users-permissions to 4.13.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-gc7p-j5xm-xxh2 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Put an independent control in front of the weakness: restrict the affected endpoint or interface to trusted networks, require an additional authentication factor or proxy-level check, and invalidate existing sessions and credentials in case the flaw has already been used.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-gc7p-j5xm-xxh2 in your dependencies?
Find it across npm, including transitive dependencies.