Skip to content

SurrealDB has Silent Failure to Overwrite Table Definition of Relation Type

Low severity GitHub Reviewed Published Dec 16, 2024 in surrealdb/surrealdb • Updated Dec 16, 2024

Package

cargo surrealdb (Rust)

Affected versions

>= 2.0.0, < 2.1.3

Patched versions

2.1.3
cargo surrealdb-core (Rust)
>= 2.0.0, < 2.1.3
2.1.3

Description

The OVERWRITE clause of the DEFINE TABLE statement would fail to overwrite data for tables that were defined with TYPE RELATION. Since table definitions include the PERMISSIONS clause, this failure would result in permissions not being overwritten as a result, which may potentially lead users to believe they have changed the table permissions when they have not.

Impact

If a user attempted to update table permissions of a table defined with TYPE RELATION using DEFINE TABLE ... OVERWRITE, permissions for the table would not be changed. This may allow a client that is authorized to run queries in a SurrealDB server to access certain data in that specific table that they were not intended to be able to access after the specified change in permissions.

Patches

The DEFINE TABLE statement has been updated to appropriately overwrite data for tables defined with TYPE RELATION.

  • Version 2.1.3 and later are not affected by this issue.

Workarounds

Users of tables with TYPE RELATION that may have been modified using the OVERWRITE clause in order to update permissions are advised to verify that the intended permissions are in place using the INFO FOR DB statement. Affected users who are unable to update and require updating permissions in a table with TYPE RELATION will be required to remove the table and define it from scratch with the intended permissions. Data can be preserved by backing it up to a temporary table.

References

  • #5260

References

@gguillemas gguillemas published to surrealdb/surrealdb Dec 16, 2024
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Dec 16, 2024
Reviewed Dec 16, 2024
Last updated Dec 16, 2024

Severity

Low

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity Low
Availability Low
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Weaknesses

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-27vq-hv74-7cqp

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.