Summary
Langflow is Missing Ownership Verification in API Key Deletion (IDOR)
Detection Method: Kolega.dev Deep Code Scan
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Location | src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/api_key.py:44-53 |
| Practical Exploitability | High |
| Developer Approver | [email protected] |
Description
The delete_api_key_route() endpoint accepts an api_key_id path parameter and deletes it with only a generic authentication check (get_current_active_user dependency). However, the delete_api_key() CRUD function does NOT verify that the API key belongs to the current user before deletion.
Affected Code
@router.delete("/{api_key_id}", dependencies=[Depends(auth_utils.get_current_active_user)])
async def delete_api_key_route(
api_key_id: UUID,
db: DbSession,
):
try:
await delete_api_key(db, api_key_id)
except Exception as e:
raise HTTPException(status_code=400, detail=str(e)) from e
return {"detail": "API Key deleted"}
Evidence
In crud.py lines 44-49, delete_api_key() retrieves the API key by ID and deletes it without checking if the key belongs to the authenticated user. The endpoint also doesn't pass the current_user to the delete function for verification.
Notes
Confirmed IDOR vulnerability. The delete_api_key_route endpoint at line 44-53 accepts an api_key_id and calls delete_api_key(db, api_key_id) without passing the current_user. The CRUD function delete_api_key() at crud.py:44-49 retrieves the API key by ID and deletes it without verifying ownership (api_key.user_id == current_user.id). Compare this to the GET endpoint at lines 17-28 which correctly filters by user_id, and the POST endpoint at lines 31-41 which correctly associates the key with user_id. An authenticated attacker can delete any user's API keys by guessing/enumerating UUIDs. Fix: Pass current_user to delete_api_key and verify api_key.user_id == current_user.id before deletion, returning 403 if unauthorized.
Developer Review Notes
Does not accept current_user as a parameter. Allowing deletion of any user's API keys even without permissions.
Impact
An authenticated attacker can enumerate and delete API keys belonging to other users by guessing or discovering their API key IDs. This allows account takeover, denial of service, and disruption of other users' integrations.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Modify the delete_api_key endpoint and function: (1) Pass current_user to the delete function; (2) In delete_api_key(), verify api_key.user_id == current_user.id before deletion; (3) Raise a 403 Forbidden error if the user doesn't own the key. Example: if api_key.user_id != user_id: raise HTTPException(status_code=403, detail='Unauthorized')
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-33053? CVE-2026-33053 is a high-severity security vulnerability in langflow (pip), affecting versions < 1.9.0. It is fixed in 1.9.0.
- Which versions of langflow are affected by CVE-2026-33053? langflow (pip) versions < 1.9.0 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-33053? Yes. CVE-2026-33053 is fixed in 1.9.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-33053 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-33053 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-33053 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-33053? Upgrade
langflowto 1.9.0 or later.