Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-28216 is a high-severity Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) vulnerability in Hoppscotch Hoppscotch. Its CVSS base score is 8.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 32th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-28216 is an authorization bypass vulnerability (CWE-639) in hoppscotch, an open source API development ecosystem. Prior to version 2026.2.0, the issue affects the GraphQL resolvers in `user-environments.resolver.ts` (lines 82-109), where the `updateUserEnvironment` mutation uses `@UseGuards(GqlAuthGuard)` but lacks the `@GqlUser()` decorator, preventing user identity extraction. This results in Prisma queries like `prisma.userEnvironment.update({ where: { id } })` without ownership filters. Similarly, `deleteUserEnvironment` checks user ID only for global environments but omits it from the actual delete query's WHERE clause, enabling any logged-in user to read, modify, or delete another user's personal environment by its ID.
An authenticated attacker with network access (AV:N) can exploit this low-complexity vulnerability (AC:L, UI:N) by obtaining a target user's environment ID, which follows the CUID format and limits mass scanning but enables targeted insider threats or info-leak combinations. Successful exploitation grants high confidentiality and integrity impacts (C:H, I:H) with low availability impact (A:L), allowing the attacker to read sensitive data like API keys, auth tokens, and secrets stored in environments, replace them with malicious values, or delete them entirely, potentially compromising API requests or downstream systems.
The hoppscotch release notes for version 2026.2.0 and the associated GitHub security advisory (GHSA-72rv-vc3j-5vqr) confirm the fix addresses the missing ownership checks in the affected mutations. Security practitioners should upgrade to version 2026.2.0 or later to mitigate the issue, as scored at CVSS 8.3 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L).
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-8913
Vulnerability Data
hoppscotch is an open source API development ecosystem. Prior to version 2026.2.0, any logged-in user can read, modify or delete another user's personal environment by ID. `user-environments.resolver.ts:82-109`, `updateUserEnvironment` mutation uses `@UseGuards(GqlAuthGuard)` but is missing the `@GqlUser()` decorator entirely. The user's…
more
identity is never extracted, so the service receives only the environment ID and performs a `prisma.userEnvironment.update({ where: { id } })` without any ownership filter. `deleteUserEnvironment` does extract the user but the service only uses the UID to check if the target is a global environment. Actual delete query uses WHERE { id } without AND userUid. hoppscotch environments store API keys, auth tokens and secrets used in API requests. An authenticated attacker who obtains another user's environment ID can read their secrets, replace them with malicious values or delete them entirely. The environment ID format is CUID, which limits mass exploitation but insider threat and combined info leak scenarios are realistic. Version 2026.2.0 fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforcing approved authorizations on every access request structurally stops a user-controlled key from reaching another user's data.
Requiring explicit access-control decisions on each request blocks unauthorized key-driven access.
Least-privilege restrictions limit the scope of data reachable even if a key check is bypassed.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.
Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect missing authorization checks but does not prevent the weakness in production.
Information access restriction explicitly enforces that users may only retrieve data they are authorized to see, directly addressing user-controlled key bypass.
Access control policy directly requires enforcement of authorization rules that prevent unauthorized access via manipulated keys.
Managing access rights includes ensuring users can only access their own records and not bypass authorization by altering identifiers.
Privileged access rights control restricts what data each user may access, mitigating direct object reference attacks.
Secure development lifecycle includes authorization design but does not itself implement runtime access checks.