CVE-2023-45810
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 a flexible authorization/permission engine built for developers and inspired by Google Zanzibar. Affected versions of OpenFGA are vulnerable to a denial of service attack. When a number of `ListObjects` calls are executed, in some scenarios, those calls are not releasing resources even after a response has been sent, and given a sufficient call volume the service as a whole becomes unresponsive. This issue has been addressed in version 1.3.4 and the upgrade is considered backwards compatible. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
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 prior to 1.3.4 contain a resource leak in the ListObjects API endpoint where resources are not properly released after responses are sent. Under sufficient call volume, this causes resource exhaustion leading to complete service unavailability.
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< 1.3.4CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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.
-
Check OpenFGA server versionRun 'openfga version' from the command line, or query the /healthz or /version API endpoint if the server is running, or inspect the container image tag or binary file metadataAffected if The version shown is prior to 1.3.4 (e.g., 1.3.3, 1.3.2, 1.2.x, etc.)
-
Verify ListObjects API is accessibleCheck if the OpenFGA server has the ListObjects API endpoint enabled by reviewing server configuration files or attempting a request to the /stores/{store_id}/list-objects endpointAffected if The ListObjects endpoint is accessible and responds to requests
-
Monitor resource consumption under loadObserve system resource usage (memory, file descriptors, connections) on the OpenFGA server while the ListObjects API receives repeated requestsAffected if Resources continue to grow without being released after each response, leading to eventual exhaustion
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 · scoped1.3.4
Upgrade to OpenFGA version 1.3.4 or later. This is a backwards-compatible point release upgrade with no known workarounds.
1.3.4
- Check current OpenFGA version running in your environment
- Backup OpenFGA configuration and any persistent data
- Upgrade OpenFGA to version 1.3.4 or later (e.g., download the latest release from github.com/openfga/openfga)
- Restart the OpenFGA service to apply the updated version
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the running version and confirming ListObjects operations complete without resource leaks
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-45810 — 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-2023-45810 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