Skip to content

OPA server Data API HTTP path injection of Rego

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 1, 2025 in open-policy-agent/opa • Updated May 5, 2025

Package

gomod github.com/open-policy-agent/opa (Go)

Affected versions

< 1.4.0

Patched versions

1.4.0
gomod github.com/open-policy-agent/opa/server (Go)
< 1.4.0
1.4.0
gomod github.com/open-policy-agent/opa/v1/server (Go)
< 1.4.0
1.4.0

Description

Impact

When run as a server, OPA exposes an HTTP Data API for reading and writing documents. Requesting a virtual document through the Data API entails policy evaluation, where a Rego query containing a single data document reference is constructed from the requested path. This query is then used for policy evaluation.

A HTTP request path can be crafted in a way that injects Rego code into the constructed query. The evaluation result cannot be made to return any other data than what is generated by the requested path, but this path can be misdirected, and the injected Rego code can be crafted to make the query succeed or fail; opening up for oracle attacks or, given the right circumstances, erroneous policy decision results. Furthermore, the injected code can be crafted to be computationally expensive, resulting in a Denial Of Service (DoS) attack.

Users are only impacted if all of the following apply:

  • OPA is deployed as a standalone server (rather than being used as a Go library)
  • The OPA server is exposed outside of the local host in an untrusted environment.
  • The configured authorization policy does not do exact matching of the input.path attribute when deciding if the request should be allowed.

or, if all of the following apply:

  • OPA is deployed as a standalone server.
  • The service connecting to OPA allows 3rd parties to insert unsanitised text into the path of the HTTP request to OPA’s Data API.

Note: With no Authorization Policy configured for restricting API access (the default configuration), the RESTful Data API provides access for managing Rego policies; and the RESTful Query API facilitates advanced queries. Full access to these APIs provides both simpler, and broader access than what the security issue describes here can facilitate. As such, OPA servers exposed to a network are not considered affected by the attack described here if they are knowingly not restricting access through an Authorization Policy.

Patches

Fixed in OPA v1.4.0.

Workarounds

Don’t publicly expose OPA’s RESTful APIs

Unless necessary for production reasons, network access to OPA’s RESTful APIs should be limited to localhost and/or trusted networks.
Since OPA v1.0, unless otherwise configured, the server listener defaults to localhost.

Enable Authentication to Only Allow Access to Trusted Clients

A configured authentication scheme is a requirement when OPA is exposed in an untrusted environment. While requiring authentication alone doesn’t mitigate this attack, it effectively reduces the scope from untrusted clients to trusted clients.

Perform Path Validation Using OPA’s Authorization Policy Functionality

OPA can be configured to use an Authorization Policy to validate all incoming requests.
By authoring the Authorization Policy to only accept paths corresponding to expected Rego package references, this attack can be fully mitigated.

The HTTP path in a Data API request is of the format /v1/data/{path:.+} (/v0/data/{path:.+}, for the v0 Data API), where data/{path:.+} directly corresponds to a reference to a virtual document, and a prefix of {path:.+} corresponds to a Rego package declaration.
E.g. the HTTP path v1/data/do/re/mi corresponds to the data reference data.do.re.mi, where do.re is the package and mi is the rule in the following Rego module:

package do.re

mi if {
	...
}

Unless otherwise configured, OPA will use the rule at data.system.authz.allow as Authorization Policy. Authorization is enabled by starting OPA with the --authorization=basic flag, and the Authorization policy must be made available to the OPA runtime either through a bundle (via the --bundle flag or through discovery) or as an individual module via the command-line.

A trivial Authorization Policy example:

package system.authz

allowed_paths := [
	["v1", "data", "policy1", "allow"],
	["v1", "data", "policy2", "allow"],
	...
]

allow if {
	input.path in allowed_paths
}

Note: configuring an Authorization Policy in OPA isn't the only way to protect against malicious request paths. Path validation and sanitisation can also be performed by connecting clients and 3rd party intermediaries, such as API gateways, reverse proxies, etc.

References

@johanfylling johanfylling published to open-policy-agent/opa May 1, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 1, 2025
Reviewed May 1, 2025
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 1, 2025
Last updated May 5, 2025

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 Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High

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:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(3rd percentile)

CVE ID

CVE-2025-46569

GHSA ID

GHSA-6m8w-jc87-6cr7

Source code

Credits

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