Skip to main content
← Vulnerabilities

Temporal Server workflow-history pagination token is not bound to the requested namespace and workflow

5.3MediumCNA
Exploited
No known exploitation
Fix
Fixed in 1.30.7, 1.31.3
Who is exposed
Not reported

Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.30.7, 1.31.3.

Published
Last modified
18/100 · provisional
None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub

Summary

Temporal Server does not check that a workflow-history pagination token matches the namespace and workflow named in the request, so a network attacker with low-privilege access can reuse a valid token from another namespace to read that namespace's workflow history. The attacker can also edit the unauthenticated token to widen the event range and clear the persistence cursor, which can return events created after their access to that namespace was removed.

Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.

Read the original description

Temporal Server does not bind a workflow-history pagination token to the namespace and workflow named in the request that presents it. GetWorkflowExecutionHistory and GetWorkflowExecutionHistoryReverse authorize the caller against the namespace in the request, then select history from the branch recorded inside the caller-supplied next_page_token. The normal history continuation carries a run identifier, event bounds, a persistence cursor, and a branch token, but no namespace or workflow identity, and it is serialized as unauthenticated protobuf bytes. An authenticated caller holding read permission on one namespace, together with a genuine non-final continuation issued earlier for a workflow in a second namespace, can submit that continuation with a request naming the first namespace and receive the second namespace's workflow history, provided the supplied workflow identifier selects the same History shard as the continuation's branch. No workflow with the supplied identifier needs to exist. Because the token is unauthenticated, a holder can also advance its event range and clear its persistence cursor, which returns history events created after that caller's current credential no longer granted access to the continuation's namespace. Determining exposure is a version question rather than a configuration question: every release listed as affected omits the binding check on the forward history path, and on the reverse history path in releases from 1.16.0, which introduced GetWorkflowExecutionHistoryReverse; no setting in an affected release restores it, and affected releases emit no metric or log for the condition, so their telemetry provides no detection. Fixed releases add the check and, when a page token's branch token is not the requested execution's current branch token, record the counter pagination_token_branch_mismatch tagged with namespace and reason and write a History-service warning log reading "Pagination branch token is not the execution's current branch token" with the fields wf-namespace, wf-id, wf-run-id, reason, wf-branch-token, and wf-request-branch-token. Search History warning logs for that message, or for reason=foreign_branch, which denotes a branch token the requested execution never recorded and is not expected in normal operation; reason=non_current_branch denotes a retained but superseded branch of the same execution and can occur legitimately after conflict resolution or failover. A foreign_branch record does not by itself prove the read was refused, because the counter and log are emitted before the enforcement decision and therefore appear both when the check rejects the request and when history.enablePaginationTokenBranchValidationShadowMode is enabled and the read is served; confirm refusal from the gRPC response, which is InvalidArgument carrying a CurrentBranchChangedFailure detail. The metric and log are tagged with the requesting namespace, not the namespace whose history the token selects, so a foreign_branch alert does not name the exposed namespace. The issue does not provide unauthenticated access, construction of a usable continuation from public workflow identifiers, enumeration of workflows for which the caller holds no continuation, or any modification of workflow state.

cve.now Index

18Pcve.now Index 18 of 100 · methodology v3 · provisional
  • Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
  • Exposure3/25Reachable over the network · Unknown: No advisory context yet
  • Reach10/20Affects Go packages
  • Severity5.3/10CVSS 5.3
  • No patch0/5No signal

What would change the score

  • Would score about 73 if added to CISA KEV
  • Would score about 68 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
  • Would score about 37 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed

What to do

  • Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.30.7, 1.31.3.

Timeline

  1. CVE published
  2. First seen by cve.now

Affected versions

  • From 1.0.0 · through 1.29.7; From 1.30.0 · fixed in 1.30.7; From 1.31.0 · fixed in 1.31.3

    Fixed in v1.30.7 (released Sep 15, 2026, 55 days before disclosure) and v1.31.3 (released Sep 14, 2026, 56 days before disclosure).

    The latest release, v1.32.2, is not affected.

Evidence 12

  1. Patch
  2. Patch
  3. Patch
  4. Patch
  5. Patch
Show all 12 sourcesShow fewer sources
  1. Patch
  2. Patch
  3. Patch
  4. Repository
  5. Repository
  6. Repository
  7. Repository

Corrections

None so far.

Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.

Questions about CVE-2026-87857

Is CVE-2026-87857 being exploited?

It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data

Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-87857?

go.temporal.io/server (Go): from 1.0.0 through 1.29.7; from 1.30.0 before 1.30.7; from 1.31.0 before 1.31.3.Source: cve.now feed data

How do I fix CVE-2026-87857?

Upgrade to a fixed version: 1.30.7, 1.31.3.Source: cve.now feed data