Skip to content

Hatchet affected by cross-tenant information disclosure in `listTasksByDAGIds`

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 1, 2026 in hatchet-dev/hatchet • Updated May 14, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/hatchet-dev/hatchet (Go)

Affected versions

<= 0.83.38

Patched versions

0.83.39

Description

Summary

A missing authorization directive on the GET /api/v1/stable/dags/tasks endpoint caused Hatchet's tenant-membership check to be skipped for this route. A user authenticated to any tenant on the same Hatchet instance could query the endpoint with another tenant's UUID and a DAG UUID belonging to that tenant, and receive task metadata for that DAG.

This issue has been patched in v0.83.39. Hatchet Cloud has been patched and requires no action from users. Self-hosted users should upgrade.

Impact

Who is affected. Multi-tenant Hatchet instances reachable by an attacker who can obtain an account on that instance. On Hatchet Cloud, account creation is open by default. On self-hosted instances, the API must be reachable by the attacker and the hostname known; instances deployed inside a VPC or with signup restricted are not exposed to arbitrary external actors.

Prerequisites for exploitation. An attacker needed:

  1. An account on the target Hatchet instance.
  2. The victim tenant's UUID.
  3. At least one DAG UUID (external_id) belonging to that tenant.

The two UUIDs are not treated as secrets — they appear in URLs, API responses, audit logs, invitation flows, shared run links, and dashboard screenshots — but an attacker does need to learn them through some out-of-band channel before exploitation is possible.

What could be disclosed. For each child task of a targeted DAG, the endpoint returned:

  • display_name, action_id, step_id
  • workflow_id, workflow_version_id, workflow_run_id, task_external_id
  • tenant_id, retry_count, status, timestamps
  • additional_metadata (JSON)

The additional_metadata field is the most sensitive: Hatchet workflows commonly use it to carry domain context such as user identifiers, customer IDs, feature flags, or correlation tokens. Its contents vary by deployment.

What was not disclosed. The raw task input payload is not part of this endpoint's response shape and was not exposed through this issue. The scope is limited to task metadata, not task arguments or results.

Exploitation status. We have no evidence that this vulnerability was exploited prior to the patch.

Root cause

Hatchet's multi-tenant authorization relies on an OpenAPI-driven middleware pipeline. Each authenticated operation declares x-resources: ["tenant", ...] in its spec. The populator middleware reads the declared resources, looks up the corresponding entities from request parameters, and stores them on the request context. The authz middleware then verifies that the authenticated user is a member of the tenant found on the context.

The listTasksByDAGIds operation accepted a tenant UUID as a query parameter, but its OpenAPI definition did not declare x-resources: ["tenant"]. As a result:

  1. The populator, which early-returns when no resources are declared, did not populate the tenant onto the request context.
  2. The authz middleware, which runs its membership check only when a tenant is present on the context, silently passed the request through.
  3. The handler read the tenant UUID directly from the query parameter and used it as the filter in the downstream OLAP query.

The SQL query itself correctly filters by tenant_id, so it returned only rows matching the supplied UUID — but the UUID came from the caller rather than from an authorization-validated context, so the filter bounded the response to the attacker-named tenant rather than to a tenant the caller was authorized to read.

Every other authenticated operation in the same path file (tasks.yaml) correctly declared x-resources. This endpoint was the only authenticated operation in the file that did not.

Patch

The fix adds the missing resource authz checks inline on the handler, enforcing valid tenant membership before the handler runs.

Shipped in v0.83.39.

Remediation

Hatchet Cloud. No action required. The patch was deployed on April 23, 2026 within the same day it was reported.

Self-hosted — recommended. Upgrade to v0.83.39 or later.

Self-hosted — if you cannot upgrade immediately. Either of the following reduces exposure until you can upgrade:

  • Restrict account creation by setting SERVER_AUTH_RESTRICTED_EMAIL_DOMAINS to an allowlist of domains you control. This prevents arbitrary users from registering an account on your instance, which removes the most common path to the prerequisite account.
  • Ensure the Hatchet API is not exposed to untrusted networks. We generally recommend running Hatchet inside a VPC and fronting the API with authenticated network controls; deployments configured this way were not reachable by arbitrary external attackers.

Timeline

All times April 23, 2026.

  • 14:05 — Reported to Hatchet.
  • 16:28 — Patch deployed to Hatchet Cloud and released as v0.83.39.
  • Public disclosure — this advisory.

Credit

Reported by @sajdakabir.

Hatchet thanks the reporter for responsibly disclosing this issue and for the clear, reproducible writeup.

References

@grutt grutt published to hatchet-dev/hatchet May 1, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 6, 2026
Reviewed May 6, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 14, 2026
Last updated May 14, 2026

Severity

Moderate

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
High
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

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.
(8th percentile)

Weaknesses

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

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. Learn more on MITRE.

Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-42572

GHSA ID

GHSA-55gc-6fmc-fpx9

Source code

Credits

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