CVE-2023-40579
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedOpenFGA is an authorization/permission engine built for developers and inspired by Google Zanzibar. Some end users of OpenFGA v1.3.0 or earlier are vulnerable to authorization bypass when calling the ListObjects API. The vulnerability affects customers using `ListObjects` with specific models. The affected models contain expressions of type `rel1 from type1`. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.1.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceOpenFGA versions 1.3.0 and earlier contain an authorization bypass vulnerability in the ListObjects API. The flaw affects customers using ListObjects with authorization models that contain expressions of type `rel1 from type1`, allowing unauthorized access to data that should be restricted.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 1.3.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed OpenFGA versionRun `openfga version` or check the Docker image tag if running via container. Compare the version number to the affected range (anything below 1.3.1).Affected if The installed version is 1.3.0 or earlier.
-
Confirm ListObjects API usageReview application logs, API access records, or code that calls the `/stores/{store_id}/list-objects` endpoint. Identify if this endpoint is actively used in the environment.Affected if ListObjects API is being called by any application or service.
-
Inspect authorization models for vulnerable expressionsQuery the OpenFGA store for all authorization models using the `/stores/{store_id}/authorization-models` endpoint. Review each model definition for the pattern `rel1 from type1` within any relationship definition, particularly in object types that are accessed via ListObjects.Affected if Any authorization model contains a relationship definition using the `rel1 from type1` syntax and that model is used with ListObjects requests.
A user is affected if their OpenFGA version is below 1.3.1 AND they use the ListObjects API with authorization models that contain expressions of the form 'rel1 from type1'.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped1.3.1
Upgrade OpenFGA to version 1.3.1 or later. Review all authorization models using ListObjects to identify and validate any models containing `rel1 from type1` expressions are now properly secured.
OpenFGA version 1.3.1 or later
- Upgrade OpenFGA to version 1.3.1 or later to resolve the authorization bypass vulnerability in the ListObjects API
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-40579 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-40579 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data