CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-27141

Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource

Published: Feb 24, 2025 | Modified: Feb 28, 2025
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Metabase Enterprise Edition is the enterprise version of Metabase business intelligence and data analytics software. Starting in version 1.47.0 and prior to versions 1.50.36, 1.51.14, 1.52.11, and 1.53.2 of Metabase Enterprise Edition, users with impersonation permissions may be able to see results of cached questions, even if their permissions don’t allow them to see the data. If some user runs a question which gets cached, and then an impersonated user runs that question, then the impersonated user sees the same results as the previous user. These cached results may include data the impersonated user should not have access to. This vulnerability only impacts the Enterprise Edition of Metabase and not the Open Source Edition. Versions 1.53.2, 1.52.11, 1.51.14, and 1.50.36 contains a patch. Versions on the 1.49.X, 1.48.X, and 1.47.X branches are vulnerable but do not have a patch available, so users should upgrade to a major version with an available fix. Disabling question caching is a workaround for this issue.

Weakness

The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Metabase Metabase 1.47.0 (including) 1.50.36 (excluding)
Metabase Metabase 1.51.0 (including) 1.51.14 (excluding)
Metabase Metabase 1.52.0 (including) 1.52.11 (excluding)
Metabase Metabase 1.53.0 (including) 1.53.2 (excluding)

Potential Mitigations

  • Run the code in a “jail” or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
  • OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
  • This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
  • Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

References