An attacker who could submit custom component source code could bypass the static security scanner by crafting an annotated class-body assignment that resolved to a dangerous callable through alias tracking; the resolved value was never checked against the dangerous callable blocklist due to the logic error. If the crafted component reached the runtime execution path, the attacker could cause arbitrary operating system commands to execute on the server in-process, with the privileges of the running service.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an incomplete denylist in the security scanner.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 allows an authenticated non-administrative user could execute arbitrary operating system commands on the server at the privilege level of the application process by constructing a flow with an MCP Tools component configured to use a local stdio subprocess transport. This bypasses both the LANGFLOWCUSTOMCOMPONENTADMINONLY and LANGFLOWBLOCKCODEINTERPRETERCOMPONENTS server-side controls intended to prevent exactly this class of access. Successful exploitation could lead to arbitrary command execution, sensitive data exposure (including credentials from the process environment), file system modification, and lateral movement to services reachable from the server.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an incomplete environment variable blocklist.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special characters in flow display names.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper validation of command-line arguments in the MCP stdio server configuration.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an unguarded eval() call on attacker-controlled input.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary Python code due to improper authorization of custom components in stored flows.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information from internal network resources due to improper validation of user-supplied URLs.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute flows and obtain sensitive information due to insufficient session expiration of API keys after user deactivation.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.5.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information and inject messages into workflow history due to improper authorization.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to delete arbitrary local files or directories due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 allows an authenticated attacker to read arbitrary files from the server filesystem — including server secret material (secretkey, JWT signing keys, the application database, /proc/self/environ, and other tenants' upload directories) — by supplying absolute paths or traversal sequences in the files parameter of an authenticated build request. The file contents were embedded as text attachments in the language model prompt and transmitted to the configured model endpoint, resulting in confidential data exfiltration. This bypassed the LANGFLOWRESTRICTLOCALFILEACCESS=true containment boundary, which was enforced for other file-reading components but not for the Chat Input to Message attachment pipeline.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information from internal services due to a URL parser discrepancy.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to server-side request forgery.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to incomplete scrubbing of sensitive credential fields.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an authorization bypass in the flow build process.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.1 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of generation of code.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.1 could allow a remote attacker to read arbitrary files due to path traversal.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.1 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary flows and access sensitive information due to improper authentication.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.11.1 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information and inject unauthorized messages due to a namespace collision between user identifiers.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 could allow a remote attacker to overwrite administrator email information and abuse the server as an outbound relay due to missing authentication for the registration endpoint.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, and 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the validatemodelproviderkey() function for the Ollama provider. The function accepts a user-supplied OLLAMABASEURL parameter and passes it directly to requests.get() without validation, scheme/host allowlisting, or filtering of private IP ranges (loopback, RFC1918, link-local addresses).

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow a remote attacker to inject arbitrary code on the system, due to the improper control of user input code.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 does not properly validate ownership in the deprecated POST /api/v1/build/{flowid}/vertices endpoint, allowing an authenticated user to inject arbitrary graph data into a shared cache for any flow. This may result in cross-user cache pollution, unauthorized workflow execution, or denial of service.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability in the MemoryComponent that allows authenticated users to access chat history of other users via sessionid collision. The MemoryComponent.retrievemessages and storemessage methods filter on sessionid without validating flowid or userid ownership, enabling cross-user information disclosure through multiple authenticated API endpoints including /api/v1/run/, /api/v1/responses, and /api/v2/workflow/. This vulnerability only affects multi-user deployments with LANGFLOWAUTOLOGIN=False.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, and 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow a remote attacker to traverse directories on the system. An attacker could send a specially crafted URL request containing "dot dot " sequences ( /.. /) to v i ew arbitrary files on the system.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a cryptographic weakness in the custom component validation mechanism. When the optional hardening mode that restricts execution to trusted component templates is enabled, the application validates component code using a truncated SHA‑256 hash. Because the hash comparison relies on only a portion of the digest, an attacker can craft malicious component code that collides with a trusted template hash and bypasses validation. Successful exploitation allows the attacker to introduce and execute unauthorized Python code within the Langflow process, defeating the intended security control and potentially leading to full compromise of the affected instance.