Answer in brief
CVE-2026-19869 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Privilege Escalation via Dropped Field-Level @authentication. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps neo4j/graphql (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps neo4j/graphql (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| neo4j/graphqlgeneric | >=7.0.0 <7.6.0 || >=5.2.0 <5.12.15 || 6.0.0 | 7.6.0, 5.12.15 |
Published upstream
Aug 18, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 18, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 18, 2026
@neo4j/graphql from 5.2.0 until the patched versions fails to enforce field-level @authentication rules on root custom-resolver fields when a type-level @authentication rule is also present on the same operation type. When both a type-level @authentication (on Query/Mutation) and a field-level @authentication (on a root custom-resolver field within that type) are declared, only the type-level rule is evaluated and the field-level rule is silently discarded. As a result a stricter per-field requirement — such as an admin-role JWT claim (jwt: { roles_INCLUDES: "admin" }) — is never checked, and any client that satisfies the coarser type-level requirement can invoke the more-restricted field. No token forgery is involved: a legitimately issued, correctly signed non-admin token (e.g. roles: ["user"]) is sufficient.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.
Answer in brief
CVE-2026-19869 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Privilege Escalation via Dropped Field-Level @authentication. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps neo4j/graphql (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps neo4j/graphql (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| neo4j/graphqlgeneric | >=7.0.0 <7.6.0 || >=5.2.0 <5.12.15 || 6.0.0 | 7.6.0, 5.12.15 |
Published upstream
Aug 18, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 18, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 18, 2026
@neo4j/graphql from 5.2.0 until the patched versions fails to enforce field-level @authentication rules on root custom-resolver fields when a type-level @authentication rule is also present on the same operation type. When both a type-level @authentication (on Query/Mutation) and a field-level @authentication (on a root custom-resolver field within that type) are declared, only the type-level rule is evaluated and the field-level rule is silently discarded. As a result a stricter per-field requirement — such as an admin-role JWT claim (jwt: { roles_INCLUDES: "admin" }) — is never checked, and any client that satisfies the coarser type-level requirement can invoke the more-restricted field. No token forgery is involved: a legitimately issued, correctly signed non-admin token (e.g. roles: ["user"]) is sufficient.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.