CVE-2026-56823
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 · uneditedAutoGPT is a workflow automation platform for creating, deploying, and managing continuous artificial intelligence agents. Prior to , the `POST /api/integrations/webhooks/{webhook_id}/ping` endpoint fetches the target webhook by primary key alone without verifying that the webhook belongs to the authenticated user. Any authenticated user can supply an arbitrary webhook_id to confirm webhook existence, leak the webhook's OAuth provider type, and in some cases trigger a ping delivery on behalf of another user. This vulnerability is fixed in .
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 confidenceAutoGPT's `POST /api/integrations/webhooks/{webhook_id}/ping` endpoint suffers from an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability where webhook lookup occurs by primary key without verifying ownership by the authenticated user. This allows any authenticated user to confirm webhook existence, disclose the OAuth provider type, and potentially trigger ping delivery on behalf of another user.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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 your AutoGPT installation versionCheck your installed package version using your package manager or check the version file in your installation directory (e.g., pyproject.toml, requirements.txt, or version.py)Affected if The installed version falls within any affected version range (compare your version to the known vulnerable versions)
-
Confirm webhook integration feature is enabledInspect your configuration files (such as config.yaml, .env, or settings.py) for any webhook or integration-related feature flagsAffected if The webhook integration feature is enabled in your configuration
-
Examine the webhook endpoint code for authorizationLocate the file handling POST /api/integrations/webhooks/{webhook_id}/ping and inspect whether ownership verification occurs before returning data or executing the ping actionAffected if The code lacks ownership/authorization checks and performs webhook lookup solely by primary key without verifying the authenticated user owns the webhook
-
Verify webhook model includes owner validationInspect the webhook model or database schema to determine if foreign key relationships exist linking webhooks to user accounts, and check if the endpoint queries enforce this relationshipAffected if Webhooks are not linked to specific users in the database or the endpoint does not enforce user-webhook relationship validation
Your environment is affected if you have a vulnerable AutoGPT version with the webhook integration feature enabled and the endpoint lacks ownership verification before accessing or acting on webhook data.
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.
From vendor dataImplement authorization checks to verify the authenticated user owns the specified webhook before returning any data or executing the ping action. Use session-based user context to validate ownership against the webhook record.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-56823 — 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-2026-56823 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