Skip to content

nebula-mesh: Operator session tokens stored in plaintext in the database

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 4, 2026 in forgekeep/nebula-mesh • Updated Jul 14, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/forgekeep/nebula-mesh (Go)

Affected versions

<= 0.3.7

Patched versions

0.3.8

Description

Impact

Operator session tokens are stored in plaintext in the operator_sessions table (the token column is the PRIMARY KEY). The session token is a 32-byte random hex value sent directly in a cookie and valid for 24 hours.

  • internal/models/operator.go:61 — OperatorSession.Token holds the plaintext token.
  • internal/store/sqlite_operators.go:590 — CreateOperatorSession inserts sess.Token verbatim.
  • internal/store/sqlite_operators.go:603,642,681,698 — lookups/updates/deletes use WHERE token = ? against the plaintext value.

Anyone who can read the database (backup, snapshot, file copy, or SQL-level disclosure) obtains every active session token and can hijack operator sessions directly, with no further authentication.

This is functionally identical to the plaintext enrollment-token issue fixed in GHSA-ghmh-jhmj-wcmf. API keys (OperatorAPIKey.KeyHash) and enrollment tokens (EnrollmentToken.TokenHash) already store only a SHA256 hash; session tokens were missed.

Patches

Store only a SHA256 hash of the session token, mirroring API keys and enrollment tokens:

  1. Add a HashSessionToken helper (alongside the existing token-hash helpers).
  2. Migration to add a token_hash column.
  3. Update CreateOperatorSession, PromoteOperatorSession, and GetOperatorBySession to write/look up by hash.
  4. Drop the plaintext token column in a follow-up migration.

Sessions are ephemeral (24h TTL), so all active sessions can be invalidated on deployment — no backward compatibility needed.

Workarounds

Restrict and encrypt database backups; rotate the operator database. These mitigate exposure but do not fix the underlying storage of plaintext tokens.

Resources

  • internal/models/operator.go:58-66
  • internal/store/sqlite_operators.go:577-698
  • Migration 005_operators.up.sql:27
  • Prior related advisory: GHSA-ghmh-jhmj-wcmf

References

@juev juev published to forgekeep/nebula-mesh Jun 4, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 14, 2026
Reviewed Jul 14, 2026
Last updated Jul 14, 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 None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity None
Availability None
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:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information

The product stores sensitive information in cleartext within a resource that might be accessible to another control sphere. Learn more on MITRE.

Insufficiently Protected Credentials

The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-53603

GHSA ID

GHSA-q4vm-pq3q-8wgq

Source code

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