By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00017854 / Revision 1

SurrealDB: Edge PERMISSIONS FOR delete bypassed when a connected node is deleted

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for surrealdb. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-whwg-vh4f-pmmfCVE-2026-49997

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

CVSS

5.4 medium

GitHub source severity; exploitability and local consequence require separate evidence.

As of · GitHub Advisory Database

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

surrealdb

source listed
  • < 3.1.0

In SurrealDB, records can be connected as a graph: a `RELATE` statement creates an edge record between two node records. If either endpoint node is deleted, SurrealDB automatically removes the edge row to keep the graph consistent. A user with permission to delete a node could also delete the edges connected to that node, even when the edge table's `PERMISSIONS FOR delete` clause should have stopped them. The automatic edge removal (`Document::purge_edges`) ran with permissions disabled (`opt.clone().with_perms(false)`), so the edge table's `PERMISSIONS FOR delete` and `PERMISSIONS FOR select` clauses were never consulted. The removal step could also observe edge state that the edge's SELECT clause should have hidden. ### Impact What an attacker **can** do: - Delete any edge connected to a node they can delete, regardless of the edge table's `PERMISSIONS FOR delete` clause. - Observe edge contents that `PERMISSIONS FOR select` should have hidden, as a side effect of the same edge-removal step. What it **can't** do: - Delete nodes on tables they do not hold `DELETE` on (the edge removal only runs from an authorised node delete). - Cross namespace or database isolation boundar

GitHub Advisory Database

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-whwg-vh4f-pmmf ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗