BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-78699High confidence

rename_tenant returns :ok on a failed rename, enabling cross-tenant access in AshPostgres

ash-project · ash postgres

7.2HighCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.16% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs ash-project ash postgres and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-68265

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

Unchecked Return Value vulnerability in ash-project ash_postgres allows a user who can drive a tenant rename to a name that collides with an existing tenant's schema to have their tenant record repointed at that other tenant's live schema, gaining access to its data. AshPostgres.MultiTenancy.rename_tenant/3 issues the ALTER SCHEMA ... RENAME TO ... with the non-raising Ecto.Adapters.SQL.query/2, discards its {:ok, _} | {:error, _} result, and unconditionally returns :ok. PostgreSQL rejects the rename when the target schema already exists (and on insufficient privilege or lock timeout), but that failure never reaches the caller. The calling manage_tenant update action therefore sees success and commits the tenant row with the new name, which is the schema of a different existing tenant, so subsequent reads and writes for that tenant run against the other tenant's data. This issue affects ash_postgres: from 0.25.0 before 2.13.0.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
7.2 · CVSS 4.0
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

Unchecked Return Value vulnerability in ash-project ash_postgres allows a user who can drive a tenant rename to a name that collides with an existing tenant's schema to have their tenant record repointed at that other tenant's live schema, gaining access to its data. AshPostgres.MultiTenancy.rename_tenant/3 issues the ALTER SCHEMA ... RENAME TO ... with the non-raising Ecto.Adapters.SQL.query/2, discards its {:ok, _} | {:error, _} result, and unconditionally returns :ok. PostgreSQL rejects the rename when the target schema already exists (and on insufficient privilege or lock timeout), but that failure never reaches the caller. The calling manage_tenant update action therefore sees success and commits the tenant row with the new name, which is the schema of a different existing tenant, so subsequent reads and writes for that tenant run against the other tenant's data. This issue affects ash_postgres: from 0.25.0 before 2.13.0.

What

Unchecked Return Value vulnerability in ash-project ash_postgres allows a user who can drive a tenant rename to a name that collides with an existing tenant's schema to have their tenant record repointed at that other tenant's live schema, gaining access to its data. AshPostgres.MultiTenancy.rename_tenant/3 issues the ALTER SCHEMA ... RENAME TO ... with the non-raising Ecto.Adapters.SQL.query/2, discards its {:ok, _} | {:error, _} result, and unconditionally returns :ok. PostgreSQL rejects the rename when the target schema already exists (and on insufficient privilege or lock timeout), but that failure never reaches the caller. The calling manage_tenant update action therefore sees success and commits the tenant row with the new name, which is the schema of a different existing tenant, so subsequent reads and writes for that tenant run against the other tenant's data. This issue affects ash_postgres: from 0.25.0 before 2.13.0.

Why

The product does not check the return value from a method or function, which can prevent it from detecting unexpected states and conditions.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

Unchecked Return Value vulnerability in ash-project ash_postgres allows a user who can drive a tenant rename to a name that collides with an existing tenant's schema to have their tenant record repointed at that other tenant's live schema, gaining access to its data. AshPostgres.MultiTenancy.rename_tenant/3 issues the ALTER SCHEMA ... RENAME TO ... with the non-raising Ecto.Adapters.SQL.query/2, discards its {:ok, _} | {:error, _} result, and unconditionally returns :ok. PostgreSQL rejects the rename when the target schema already exists (and on insufficient privilege or lock timeout), but that failure never reaches the caller. The calling manage_tenant update action therefore sees success and commits the tenant row with the new name, which is the schema of a different existing tenant, so subsequent reads and writes for that tenant run against the other tenant's data. This issue affects ash_postgres: from 0.25.0 before 2.13.0.

Why

The product does not check the return value from a method or function, which can prevent it from detecting unexpected states and conditions.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
Reference recorded

CISA Vulnrichment records proof-of-concept exploitation in its SSVC data. BlackTree has not independently executed or validated exploit material.

Likely attack path
local access → Unchecked Return Value → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-252 ↗

CWE-252: Unchecked Return Value. The product does not check the return value from a method or function, which can prevent it from detecting unexpected states and conditions.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
CWE-252Public exploit reference
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-68265Official EUVD mapping

Unchecked Return Value vulnerability in ash-project ash_postgres allows a user who can drive a tenant rename to a name that collides with an existing tenant's schema to have their tenant record repointed at that other tenant's live schema, gaining access to its data. AshPostgres.MultiTenancy.rename_tenant/3 issues the ALTER SCHEMA ... RENAME TO ... with the non-raising Ecto.Adapters.SQL.query/2, discards its {:ok, _} | {:error, _} result, and unconditionally returns :ok. PostgreSQL rejects the rename when the target schema already exists (and on insufficient privilege or lock timeout), but that failure never reaches the caller. The calling manage_tenant update action therefore sees success and commits the tenant row with the new name, which is the schema of a different existing tenant, so subsequent reads and writes for that tenant run against the other tenant's data. This issue affects ash_postgres: from 0.25.0 before 2.13.0.

Official EUVD record ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260902Security Bulletin 2 Sept 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 2 Sept 2026, published on 2 September 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
ash postgres: 0.25.0 < 2.13.0, 03510dae24020e302558ef947be7ea874a9ce756 < 8544ab15fe45784553c2d2da8ee1a388eee0174b
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 30 Aug 2026 · Last source change 1 Sept 2026, 12:30 UTC · CWE-252 · Unchecked Return Value

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-31
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-68265
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Public exploit evidencePublic exploit evidence changed from No public exploit to Public exploit reference.
    Before
    No public exploit
    After
    Public exploit reference
    CVE.org ↗
  2. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-68265 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-68265"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  3. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    0.25.0 < 2.13.0; 03510dae24020e302558ef947be7ea874a9ce756 < 8544ab15fe45784553c2d2da8ee1a388eee0174b · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
    After
    ash postgres: 0.25.0 < 2.13.0, 03510dae24020e302558ef947be7ea874a9ce756 < 8544ab15fe45784553c2d2da8ee1a388eee0174b · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
    CNA ↗
  4. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-68265↗CISA Vulnrichment SSVC evidence↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-78699 · cve.blacktree.nl