Langflow is a tool for building and deploying AI-powered agents and workflows. From 1.0.0 until 1.10.1, Langflow did not verify flow ownership in the deprecated POST /api/v1/build/{flow_id}/vertices and POST /api/v1/build/{flow_id}/vertices/{vertex_id} handlers. Through version 1.7.1, an unauthenticated caller who knew another users flow UUID could reach these handlers; from version 1.7.2 through 1.10.0, callers had to authenticate but needed no elevated privileges. Such a caller could cause retrieve_vertices_order to load and cache the private graph, enumerate its vertex identifiers, and use build_vertex to execute selected vertices and receive their results. build_graph_from_db_no_cache performed a primary-key lookup without an owner filter. This could disclose private flow structure, configured values, and selected outputs and could trigger victim-configured side effects and build-history records, although it did not expose the victims variable-store credentials or permit modification of the stored flow. This issue is fixed in Langflow 1.10.1 and langflow-base 0.10.1.
The system’s authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user’s data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Retrieval of a user record occurs in the system based on some key value that is under user control. The key would typically identify a user-related record stored in the system and would be used to lookup that record for presentation to the user. It is likely that an attacker would have to be an authenticated user in the system. However, the authorization process would not properly check the data access operation to ensure that the authenticated user performing the operation has sufficient entitlements to perform the requested data access, hence bypassing any other authorization checks present in the system. For example, attackers can look at places where user specific data is retrieved (e.g. search screens) and determine whether the key for the item being looked up is controllable externally. The key may be a hidden field in the HTML form field, might be passed as a URL parameter or as an unencrypted cookie variable, then in each of these cases it will be possible to tamper with the key value. One manifestation of this weakness is when a system uses sequential or otherwise easily-guessable session IDs that would allow one user to easily switch to another user’s session and read/modify their data.