SurrealDB < 3.1.5 Information Disclosure via ORDER BY

CISA KEV is observed exploitation evidence. FIRST EPSS is a dated prediction of exploitation in the next 30 days. Missing scores are unknown. This collector requests predictions only for explicit CVE aliases in the public NuGet archive; Microsoft release views retain their existing prediction scope.

No collected risk observation for these identifiers. This does not establish absence of exploitation or a zero probability.

SurrealDB before 3.1.5 fail to apply field-level SELECT permissions to ORDER BY clauses, allowing authenticated users to leak the relative ordering of restricted field values. Attackers can issue ORDER BY queries on indexed restricted fields to recover the hidden values' sort order across records, even though the field itself returns null as intended.

Source published

17 Jul 2026 16:14:51 UTC

Source modified

28 Jul 2026 01:05:30 UTC

Observed here

23 Oct 2026 15:48:27 UTC

Source terms

CVE Program Terms of Use

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

This view projects the publisher's source fields for reading; the original JSON retains additional fields and CVE enrichment containers. Attribution: cve-program · CVE Program Terms of Use. Source text is retained; field grouping and change labels are provided by ChangeIntel.

CVSS 4.0 · 5.3 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

CVSS 3.1 · 4.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

SurrealDB before 3.1.5 fail to apply field-level SELECT permissions to ORDER BY clauses, allowing authenticated users to leak the relative ordering of restricted field values. Attackers can issue ORDER BY queries on indexed restricted fields to recover the hidden values' sort order across records, even though the field itself returns null as intended.

Source published

Jul 17, 2026, 4:14:51 PM (timezone not stated)

Source modified

Jul 28, 2026, 1:05:30 AM (timezone not stated)

Observed here

6 Nov 2026 04:38:38 UTC

Source terms

ENISA EUVD · source terms and attribution apply

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

This view projects the publisher's source fields for reading; the original JSON retains additional fields and CVE enrichment containers. Attribution: euvd · ENISA EUVD · source terms and attribution apply. Source text is retained; field grouping and change labels are provided by ChangeIntel.

EUVD CVSS 4.0 · 5.3 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

SurrealDB before 3.1.5 fail to apply field-level SELECT permissions to ORDER BY clauses, allowing authenticated users to leak the relative ordering of restricted field values. Attackers can issue ORDER BY queries on indexed restricted fields to recover the hidden values' sort order across records, even though the field itself returns null as intended.

Source published

17 Jul 2026 17:17:17 UTC

Source modified

24 Oct 2026 13:10:00 UTC

Observed here

4 Nov 2026 03:59:20 UTC

Source terms

NIST NVD usage terms; underlying source attribution retained

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

This view projects the publisher's source fields for reading; the original JSON retains additional fields and CVE enrichment containers. Attribution: nvd · NIST NVD usage terms; underlying source attribution retained. Source text is retained; field grouping and change labels are provided by ChangeIntel.

CVSS 4.0 · [email protected] · Secondary · 5.3 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

CVSS 3.1 · [email protected] · Primary · 4.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

## Duplicate Advisory This advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-h4h3-3rfj-x6fq. This link is maintained to preserve external references. ## Original Description SurrealDB before 3.1.5 fail to apply field-level SELECT permissions to ORDER BY clauses, allowing authenticated users to leak the relative ordering of restricted field values. Attackers can issue ORDER BY queries on indexed restricted fields to recover the hidden values' sort order across records, even though the field itself returns null as intended.

Source published

17 Jul 2026 18:31:27 UTC

Source modified

3 Sep 2026 20:15:05 UTC

Observed here

24 Oct 2026 13:19:54 UTC

Source terms

GitHub Advisory Database · CC-BY-4.0

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

This view projects the publisher's source fields for reading; the original JSON retains additional fields and CVE enrichment containers. Attribution: osv · GitHub Advisory Database · CC-BY-4.0. Source text is retained; field grouping and change labels are provided by ChangeIntel.

CVSS_V3 · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

CVSS_V4 · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

Publisher rating · MODERATE

A field can be hidden from a user with a field-level SELECT permission (`DEFINE FIELD code ON secret PERMISSIONS FOR select WHERE owner = $auth.id`). When that field is indexed, a record user who cannot read it could still recover the relative ordering of its values across every record by issuing `ORDER BY <field>`: the field came back `null` as intended, but the rows were returned in the hidden values' true sorted order. To satisfy the sort, the planner selects the field's index and walks it in value order; the field-level permission is applied later, when the row is projected, so the value is nulled but the row order already encodes it. The guard that withholds restricted fields from the `WHERE` path was never applied to `ORDER BY`. ## Impact What an attacker **can** do: - As a record (scope) user with table SELECT, learn the relative ordering of a field hidden by a field-level SELECT permission, across other users' records, by ordering on it when an index covers the field — the value returns `null`, but the rows come back in the hidden values' order. - With rows they control in the same table, use that ordering to narrow the hidden values toward exact ones. What it **can't** do: - Read the field value directly — only its relative ordering leaks; the projected value is correctly redacted. - Cross table, record, or namespace/database boundaries — the table's SELECT permission and any row-level `WHERE` are still enforced, so only records the caller may already read are ordered. - Leak anything when the restricted field is not indexed, affect root or record-owner sessions, or modify data (confidentiality only). ## Patches The query planner now applies the field-permission guard to the `ORDER BY` clause as well as the `WHERE` clause. When an ordered field is hidden from the caller by a field-level SELECT permission, the index sort pushdown is withheld and the rows are sorted after redaction instead, so the row order no longer reflects the hidden values. The dynamic-scan fallback is closed the same way, and a regression test was added. The fix is included in SurrealDB 3.1.5. ## Workarounds Users unable to upgrade are advised to consider the following: - Force the legacy executor with `SURREAL_PLANNER_STRATEGY=compute-only`; the sort then runs after redaction, so no ordering leaks. - Do not place an index on a field whose values are hidden by a field-level SELECT permission — without the index the leak does not occur. - Do not rely on field-level SELECT permissions to hide values on indexed fields from record users; restrict at the table level instead. - Use namespace / database isolation as the primary trust boundary where feasible. ## References - [SurrealQL Documentation — DEFINE FIELD](https://surrealdb.com/docs/surrealql/statements/define/field) - [SurrealQL Documentation — DEFINE INDEX](https://surrealdb.com/docs/surrealql/statements/define/indexes) - [SurrealQL Documentation — DEFINE TABLE … PERMISSIONS](https://surrealdb.com/docs/surrealql/statements/define/table) - Related advisory (same class, indexed COUNT variant): [GHSA-c8jx-96c9-8xrp](https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb/security/advisories/GHSA-c8jx-96c9-8xrp) - `fix(planner): prevent ORDER BY value-ordering oracle on restricted SELECT fields` - `fix(planner): close ORDER BY value-ordering oracle on the DynamicScan fallback` ## Acknowledgements Thanks to George Chen ([@geo-chen](https://github.com/geo-chen)) for finding and reporting this issue.

Source published

19 Jun 2026 22:10:50 UTC

Source modified

4 Nov 2026 02:56:06 UTC

Observed here

4 Nov 2026 03:59:15 UTC

Source terms

GitHub Advisory Database · CC-BY-4.0

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

This view projects the publisher's source fields for reading; the original JSON retains additional fields and CVE enrichment containers. Attribution: osv · GitHub Advisory Database · CC-BY-4.0. Source text is retained; field grouping and change labels are provided by ChangeIntel.

CVSS_V3 · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Publisher rating · MODERATE