CVE-2025-46720

Keystone has an unintended `isFilterable` bypass that can be used as an oracle to match hidden fields

MEDIUM
4.3
CVSS Score
Published: May 5, 2025 at 06:53 PM UTC
Updated: June 17, 2026 at 09:26 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorKeystone

Using keystone by keystonejs?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect keystone - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM4.3
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.3%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

Keystone is a content management system for Node.js. Prior to version 6.5.0, `{field}.isFilterable` access control can be bypassed in `update` and `delete` mutations by adding additional unique filters. These filters can be used as an oracle to probe the existence or value of otherwise unreadable fields. Specifically, when a mutation includes a `where` clause with multiple unique filters (e.g. `id` and `email`), Keystone will attempt to match records even if filtering by the latter fields would normally be rejected by `field.isFilterable` or `list.defaultIsFilterable`. This can allow malicious actors to infer the presence of a particular field value when a filter is successful in returning a result. This affects any project relying on the default or dynamic `isFilterable` behavior (at the list or field level) to prevent external users from using the filtering of fields as a discovery mechanism. While this access control is respected during `findMany` operations, it was not completely enforced during `update` and `delete` mutations when accepting more than one unique `where` values in filters. This has no impact on projects using `isFilterable: false` or `defaultIsFilterable: false` for sensitive fields, or for those who have otherwise omitted filtering by these fields from their GraphQL schema. This issue has been patched in `@keystone-6/core` version 6.5.0. To mitigate this issue in older versions where patching is not a viable pathway, set `isFilterable: false` statically for relevant fields to prevent filtering by them earlier in the access control pipeline (that is, don't use functions); set `{field}.graphql.omit.read: true` for relevant fields, which implicitly removes filtering by these fields from the GraphQL schema; and/or deny `update` and `delete` operations for the relevant lists completely.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

v < 6.5.0
Affected range stops below 6.5.0, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

References (1)

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
LOW
Availability
NONE
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusANALYZED
CWE
CWE-200CWE-203NVD-CWE-noinfo

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card