VulnerabilityPublished 24 Jun 2026

CVE-2026-55583: twentyhq twenty · Insecure Direct Object Reference

Affects twentyhq twentySource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High : upgrade to 2.9.0 soon.

Data as of 6 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.6High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.9.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Jun 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 6 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade twenty and twentyhq/twenty to 2.9.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
twentyhqtwenty	Affected <2.9.0	Fixed in 2.9.0
GitHubtwentyhq/twenty`pkg:github/twentyhq/twenty`Other threats	Affected <2.9.0	Fixed in 2.9.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

A fix is available in twenty version 2.9.0 that adds proper workspace ownership verification to the affected queries and mutations. Users should upgrade to version 2.9.0 or later to remediate this vulnerability. No vendor advisory is provided, but the fix is explicitly stated in the description. Until upgrading, restrict AI settings access to trusted users only.

Description

Twenty is an open-source CRM (customer relationship management) platform. Prior to 2.9.0, Twenty was vulnerable to a cross-workspace insecure direct object reference (IDOR) in the AI agent monitor's AgentTurnResolver, in packages/twenty-server/src/engine/metadata-modules/ai/ai-agent-monitor/reso lvers/agent-turn.resolver.ts. The agentTurns(agentId) query and the evaluateAgentTurn(turnId) mutation looked up rows by agentId or id only; although AgentTurnEntity has a workspaceId column, it was not included in the WHERE clause, and the class-level guards only checked that the caller was authenticated in some workspace rather than that the requested object belonged to it, with the same flaw present in agent-turn-grader.service.ts. As a result, any authenticated user with the AI settings flag, a workspace owner by default, could target any other workspace on the same instance given the victim's agentId or turnId: agentTurns returned the victim's full chat history including message parts such as raw chat text, tool calls, and tool outputs, while evaluateAgentTurn inserted an agentTurnEvaluation row with the victim's workspaceId and fed the victim's turn into the default LLM. The agentId and turnId are non-guessable UUIDs but are exposed in the URL of the settings page. This issue is fixed in version 2.9.0.

Impact

An attacker who is authenticated and has the AI settings flag (default for workspace owners) can access sensitive chat histories and related data from other workspaces on the same instance, violating data confidentiality. They can also insert evaluation records into victim workspaces, potentially affecting data integrity. The vulnerability does not impact availability. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 7.6 (high), reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, privileges required, user interaction required, scope change, high confidentiality impact, low integrity impact, and no availability impact.

Summary

CVE-2026-55583 is an authorization bypass vulnerability in the twentyhq 'twenty' CRM platform before version 2.9.0. The issue arises from missing workspace ownership checks in the AI agent monitor's AgentTurnResolver and related services. The agentTurns(agentId) query and evaluateAgentTurn(turnId) mutation only filtered by agentId or turnId without verifying the workspaceId, allowing an authenticated user with the AI settings flag to access or modify agent turn data across different workspaces on the same instance. Although agentId and turnId are UUIDs, they are exposed in URLs, facilitating targeted exploitation. This leads to unauthorized disclosure of full chat histories and unauthorized insertion of evaluation data tied to victim workspaces. The vulnerability is addressed by adding proper workspace ownership checks in version 2.9.0.

CWE-639Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #24OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
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.
Architecture and Design
For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
Architecture and Design
Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V4.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/twentyhq/twenty/security/advisories/GHSA-v39r-w5vg-j9pp (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 1 Jul 2026, 22:39 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats