CVE-2026-86338Medium· 6.0▾ SunlitAsh field_policies are documented to protect against filter-based information disclosure: when a field the actor may not see is referenced in a filter, it is replaced with an expression that evaluates to nil, so a filter cannot be used a…
▾ Sunlit zone — Low / medium · no exploitation signal
impact 33 · likelihood 0.1 · exploitation 0
Need a working PoC? Pro members can cast a request and our team develops one — it lands right here.
Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization from CISA's ADP record at CVE.org: whether exploitation is observed, whether an attack can be automated, and how much of the system is at stake. The CVSS score shown above comes from the assigning CNA record, not NVD.
Exploit-prediction probability, daily snapshots since Sep 19.
Disclosure to exploitation, from the record and what we observed since indexing it.
Disclosed via NVD
0.3%
0.3% → 0.4%
Ash field_policies are documented to protect against filter-based information disclosure: when a field the actor may not see is referenced in a filter, it is replaced with an expression that evaluates to nil, so a filter cannot be used as a yes/no oracle to read a value the actor cannot see.
This nilling was applied to attributes but not to calculations or aggregates. A user-supplied filter reference to a calculation or aggregate carries an Ash.Query.Calculation / Ash.Query.Aggregate struct, which the authorizer's reference replacement did not match (it only matched the Ash.Resource.* structs), so the filter ran against the real value.
As a result, an actor whose field policies forbid a calculation or aggregate can still filter by it (for example filter(secret_calc == "x") or filter(comment_count == n)) and learn the value from whether rows match — an oracle that recovers field-policy-protected values one probe at a time. Filtering is commonly exposed to lower-privileged actors (for example via AshGraphql or AshJsonApi filter arguments), which is exactly the surface field policies are meant to protect.
The fix routes filter references to calculations and aggregates through the same field-policy nilling as attributes.
This issue affects ash: from 2.11.0-rc.0 before 3.33.4.
Refer to the linked advisories for vendor-supplied fixes and affected version ranges.
Connected by shared product, vendor, weakness, or advisory.
CVE-2026-96581High· 7.6An upsert on the primary key in Ash ignores attribute multitenancy, so one tenant can read, overwrite and take over another tenant's records
CVE-2026-114214Medium· 6.0Loading a through relationship with a limit of 1 in Ash ignores the through path and returns unrelated destination records
CVE-2026-101028Medium· 6.5Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash allows an actor to infer data in related records they cannot read via Ash.count/2, Ash.exists/2 and Ash.aggregate/3. Ash.Actions.Aggregate.run/4 (lib/ash/actions/aggregate.ex) app…
CVE-2026-94201High· 8.2Ash stores :atom-typed attributes as strings and compares them as strings
CVE-2026-93477Medium· 5.9Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes vulnerability in ash-project ash allows a user to set the value of a private action argument on the bulk destroy and bulk update paths. Action arguments decl…
CVE-2026-78230Medium· 6.0AshAi exposes Ash read actions to language-model tool calls