Threat Intelligence Database

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.

CVE-2026-82752 is a medium severity vulnerability in the ash-project ash framework affecting versions from 0.10.0 up to but not including 3.33.0. It involves improper validation of specified quantity in input, where string length constraints are measured by Unicode graphemes rather than codepoints. This discrepancy allows an attacker to store arbitrarily large values in attributes despite small maximum length constraints, potentially leading to unbounded storage growth. The mismatch between validation and storage length counting can also cause data truncation or rejection at the database layer.

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash returns records that a runtime read policy denies to any actor. When a resource has an access_type :runtime read policy (a check evaluated per record rather than compiled to a filter), Ash.Policy.Authorizer decides each record in check_result/1 (lib/ash/policy/authorizer/authorizer.ex) by discarding impossible policy scenarios and inspecting what remains. When every scenario for a record was impossible, meaning no policy can authorize it and it must be forbidden, the empty-scenario branch instead kept the record ({[record | data], authorizer, any_forbidden?}) and returned it as authorized. As a result, records the runtime read policy denies are returned to any actor. The fix forbids a record whose scenarios are all impossible. This issue affects ash: from 3.4.44 before 3.32.2.

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash widens a relationship's parent(...) scoping filter to match unintended records when the referenced parent field cannot be resolved. Loading a relationship whose filter references parent(...) resolves that expression against the parent record. resolve_parent_in_filter/3 (lib/ash/actions/read/relationships.ex) resolved an unresolvable parent reference (for example when the referenced field was not selected on the source query) to nil rather than failing. A scoping predicate such as org_id == parent(org_id) then becomes an IS NULL match, and a guard like is_nil(parent(org_id)) or org_id == parent(org_id) activates its unrestricted branch, so the relationship returns records the scope was meant to exclude. The fix fails the read with an error when a parent(...) reference cannot be resolved, instead of defaulting to nil. This issue affects ash: from 3.13.2 before 3.32.2.

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash authorizes an aggregate under one read action while computing it under another, so an aggregate can run with policies that do not match the action it was authorized against. Ash.Actions.Aggregate groups aggregates by their {authorize?, read_action} and authorizes each group under that read action, but when building the data query it selected the action as opts[:action] || read_action || <primary read> (lib/ash/actions/aggregate.ex). When a caller passed an :action option, the aggregate query ran under that action while authorization had been computed for the group's own read_action. If the run action's read policies are more permissive than the authorized one, the aggregate (a count or sum) is computed over records the authorized action's policies would have excluded, disclosing information about data the actor cannot read. The fix runs the aggregate under the same read_action it is authorized against. This issue affects ash: from 3.5.13 before 3.32.2.

Missing Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash allows an actor to update records forbidden by resource policies through the atomic path of Ash.update_many/4. Ash.update_many/4 runs as a single atomic statement (a data-layer update_many, for example a SQL MERGE) whenever an atomic strategy is used and the data layer supports it. Ash.Actions.Update.UpdateMany (lib/ash/actions/update/update_many.ex) took that path even under authorize?: true without applying the resource's policies, so the statement updated every row matched by primary key regardless of the policy filter that authorization would impose. An actor could therefore update records the policies forbid, such as rows belonging to another actor or tenant. The fix restricts the atomic path to data layers supporting changeset filters when authorizing, authorizes each changeset, and merges the resulting policy filter into each changeset so the statement only touches authorized rows. This issue affects ash: from 3.29.0 before 3.32.2.

Improper Access Control vulnerability in ash-project ash lets a create action overwrite an existing record when the ETS or Mnesia data layer is used, because neither enforced primary-key uniqueness on insert. Unlike a SQL data layer, whose unique primary-key constraint rejects a duplicate, the ETS and Mnesia data layers implemented create as a keyed insert that replaces any existing entry with the same primary key (lib/ash/data_layer/ets/ets.ex, lib/ash/data_layer/mnesia/mnesia.ex). An actor who can set the primary key on a create (for example a user-supplied string or integer key) can submit a create whose key matches an existing record and silently overwrite it, destroying and replacing another entity's data without going through the update action or its policies. The fix rejects a create whose primary key already exists with an already-taken error, and only allows duplicates for keyless resources. This issue affects ash: from 0.4.0 before 3.32.2.

Not Failing Securely (Failing Open) vulnerability in ash-project ash skips an Ash.Reactor change when the guard controlling it raises, so a change meant to run does not. An Ash.Reactor change step can be gated by where validations that decide whether the change runs. Ash.Reactor.ChangeStep (lib/ash/reactor/steps/change_step.ex) evaluated those guards in apply_where_clauses/3, and apply_validation rescued any exception into {:error, error}. The reduce treated that identically to a guard whose condition was simply not met and bypassed the change. So when a guard raises (for example on attacker-influenced input), a change that enforces a security-relevant modification is skipped rather than failing the step. The fix distinguishes a raised exception (now {:raised, error}) and halts the step with an error, failing closed. This issue affects ash: from 3.0.0-rc.17 before 3.32.2.

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in ash-project ash lets a slow asynchronous read spin a scheduler thread at full CPU while the framework waits for it. Ash.Actions.Read.AsyncLimiter.await_at_least_one/1 (lib/ash/actions/read/async_limiter.ex) waited for concurrent async read tasks by polling each with Task.yield(task, 0) in a tight loop rather than blocking. While every outstanding task is still running (a slow related-data load or calculation), the loop returns immediately and repeats, busy-spinning and holding a BEAM scheduler at full CPU for the whole duration of the slow read; concurrent slow reads tie up further schedulers. The fix waits with Task.yield_many (a non-blocking sweep followed by a blocking wait with timeout: :infinity), so the process sleeps until a task completes instead of spinning. This issue affects ash: from 2.19.0 before 3.32.2.

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in ash-project ash lets an attacker exhaust node memory by matching a filter that spans multiple to-many relationships in memory. Ash.Filter.Runtime matches a filter against an in-memory record by first expanding the record into combinations of its related rows. flatten_relationships/2 (lib/ash/filter/runtime.ex) eagerly built the full Cartesian product across the filter's to-many relationship paths, so a record with K to-many relationships of M rows each materialized on the order of M^K scenarios before any predicate was checked. A filter or dataset that reaches several sizeable to-many relationships therefore allocates memory combinatorially and can exhaust the node. The fix streams the expansion lazily and short-circuits on the first matching scenario, bounding the work. This issue affects ash: from 1.29.0-rc0 before 3.32.2.