CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-55170

Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity

Published: Jul 09, 2026 | Modified: Jul 14, 2026
CVSS 3.x
5.4
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
5.4 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Ubuntu
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

OpenFGA is an authorization/permission engine built for developers. Prior to 1.18.0, when MySQL is being used as the datastore and authorization decisions rely on case-sensitive user strings, the tuple, changelog, and authorization_model identifier columns can compare case-distinct values such as user:Alice and user:alice as equivalent, causing two distinct check requests to return the same response. This issue is fixed in 1.18.0.

Weakness

The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Helm_chartsOpenfga*0.3.9 (excluding)
OpenfgaOpenfga*1.18.0 (excluding)

Extended Description

Improperly handled case sensitive data can lead to several possible consequences, including:

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

References