CVE-2026-45296 (GCVE-0-2026-45296)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-28 16:51 – Updated: 2026-05-28 16:51
VLAI
Title
OpenReplay: Cross-tenant information disclosure in app_apikey projectKey routes via missing tenant binding
Summary
OpenReplay is a self-hosted session replay suite. Prior to 1.26.0, OpenReplay's Python API exposes several app_apikey routes that trust a caller-provided projectKey after validating only that the API key itself is valid and that the target projectKey exists. The authorization flow does not verify that the authenticated API key and the requested project belong to the same tenant. Because the public tracker design exposes projectKey to browser-side code, an attacker who owns any valid API key for their own tenant can target another tenant's project by reusing that public projectKey. The vulnerable routes allow the attacker to enumerate victim user sessions and then retrieve sensitive session event data across the tenant boundary. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.26.0.
Severity
7.7 (High)
CWE
- CWE-284 - Improper Access Control
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/openreplay/openreplay/security… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| openreplay | openreplay |
Affected:
< 1.26.0
|
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "openreplay",
"vendor": "openreplay",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 1.26.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "OpenReplay is a self-hosted session replay suite. Prior to 1.26.0, OpenReplay\u0027s Python API exposes several app_apikey routes that trust a caller-provided projectKey after validating only that the API key itself is valid and that the target projectKey exists. The authorization flow does not verify that the authenticated API key and the requested project belong to the same tenant. Because the public tracker design exposes projectKey to browser-side code, an attacker who owns any valid API key for their own tenant can target another tenant\u0027s project by reusing that public projectKey. The vulnerable routes allow the attacker to enumerate victim user sessions and then retrieve sensitive session event data across the tenant boundary. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.26.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 7.7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-284",
"description": "CWE-284: Improper Access Control",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-28T16:51:47.094Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/openreplay/openreplay/security/advisories/GHSA-8wmc-vpmf-cjf5",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openreplay/openreplay/security/advisories/GHSA-8wmc-vpmf-cjf5"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-8wmc-vpmf-cjf5",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "OpenReplay: Cross-tenant information disclosure in app_apikey projectKey routes via missing tenant binding"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-45296",
"datePublished": "2026-05-28T16:51:47.094Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-11T20:14:43.201Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-28T16:51:47.094Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-45296\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2026-05-28T18:16:34.507\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-05-28T18:40:37.990\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Deferred\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"OpenReplay is a self-hosted session replay suite. Prior to 1.26.0, OpenReplay\u0027s Python API exposes several app_apikey routes that trust a caller-provided projectKey after validating only that the API key itself is valid and that the target projectKey exists. The authorization flow does not verify that the authenticated API key and the requested project belong to the same tenant. Because the public tracker design exposes projectKey to browser-side code, an attacker who owns any valid API key for their own tenant can target another tenant\u0027s project by reusing that public projectKey. The vulnerable routes allow the attacker to enumerate victim user sessions and then retrieve sensitive session event data across the tenant boundary. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.26.0.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":7.7,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"CHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":3.1,\"impactScore\":4.0}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-284\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/openreplay/openreplay/security/advisories/GHSA-8wmc-vpmf-cjf5\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\"}]}}"
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…