Grafana penetration testing: what a security assessment covers
A Grafana penetration test is a hands-on attempt to break into a self-hosted Grafana the way an attacker or a hostile insider would, and to report what it could reach. Commission one before a shared instance is exposed to more users, before it is placed in front of production metrics, logs or SQL systems, or after a major change to authentication, data sources or plugins. The reader's situation is usually this: one Grafana serves many teams, it queries sensitive operational data, and someone needs evidence that the instance is safe to expose beyond the network it was first built on.
The Grafana documentation describes the platform and its hardening options, including secure and SameSite cookies, a Content Security Policy, Trusted Types, hiding the version from unauthenticated users, requiring authentication for the metrics endpoint and domain verification against DNS rebinding. A test answers a different question: whether those settings hold in your environment, behind your load balancer and proxies, with your identity provider and your role mappings. A setting that is correct in a default install can be overridden by a reverse proxy, a container variable or a provisioning file, and only a test that tries the request will show it.
The scope should name the parts of the instance a tester will exercise: how users sign in and how external groups map to Grafana roles and folder permissions, whether the data source proxy can be used to reach systems a user should not see, which plugins are installed and where they came from, what shared dashboards, snapshots and anonymous access expose, and whether the hardening settings are what the configuration files say they are. Ask the provider to state which of these are in scope and which are excluded, and to confirm that retesting after fixes is part of the written scope.
Which Grafana areas a tester should cover
A shared Grafana instance concentrates access to many data sources, credentials and dashboards in one application. The areas below are where a tester usually finds the gaps that matter most, and they overlap, so a scope should cover how a weakness in one area widens access in another.
Authentication and role mapping
Test how users sign in through the chosen identity provider and how group claims map to Grafana organization roles. Check that a removed user loses access, that role mapping cannot be changed by the user, and that local admin accounts are controlled. The mapping rules are the main risk, because a permissive group claim can grant editor or admin rights to people who should only view dashboards. Confirm which login methods your edition supports before setting the test plan.
Data source proxying and stored credentials
Grafana can proxy requests to data sources, so a user with query access may reach backends using credentials the user never sees. Test whether a viewer can send arbitrary queries, reach internal hosts through a data source URL, or read stored passwords and tokens through the API. Check that data source credentials are scoped to read-only accounts where the backend allows it. A shared instance often holds access to many systems at once.
Plugin installation and trust
Plugins run code inside or alongside the Grafana server and can add data sources, panels and apps. Test who can install plugins, whether unsigned plugins can load, and whether plugin routes expose internal endpoints. Confirm where each plugin comes from and who reviews updates. A plugin installed by an editor is a route to the server, so installation rights should match the trust placed in the plugin.
Dashboard and folder permissions
Check that folder and dashboard permissions match the access model, including inherited permissions, team assignments and dashboards moved between folders. Test whether a user can view, edit or export a dashboard they should not reach, and whether data in panels leaks through queries that ignore folder boundaries. Permission checks are where access control tests usually find the most issues, because they depend on how teams have organized content.
Sharing features and public exposure
Snapshots, externally shared dashboards and anonymous access can publish data outside the instance. Test whether snapshots can be created with live data, who can publish them, how long they remain available, and whether anonymous access is enabled on any organization. Check annotation and variable behavior in shared dashboards, since these can reveal more than the panels show. Confirm the settings in your Grafana version before writing test cases.
Hardening settings and exposed endpoints
Compare the running configuration with the Grafana security hardening guidance: secure and SameSite cookies, a Content Security Policy, Trusted Types, hidden version information, authentication on the metrics endpoint and domain verification against DNS rebinding. Test each setting on the running instance rather than in the configuration file alone, since a reverse proxy or container setting can change the result. Record each exception with the reason it is accepted.
How to scope a Grafana test before you hire anyone
The first decision is how much the tester knows before testing starts. In a black-box test, the tester works from the outside with no documentation or source. The OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS) 5.0.0 strongly encourages documentation or source-led (hybrid) testing over testing without either, and it notes that automated DAST and SAST tools cannot fully verify many requirements, especially business logic and access control. For a Grafana instance, those are the areas that matter most: which role can see which folder, whether a Viewer can reach an Editor's data source, and whether a team sync or auth proxy header maps users to the right organization. Ask the provider to state in writing which mode they will use, what configuration files and provisioning definitions they will receive, and which requirements they will verify by hand.
Next, define the boundary and the accounts. Decide whether the database (MySQL or PostgreSQL in a production or high availability setup) and the reverse proxy in front of Grafana are in scope, because misconfigured proxy headers and exposed database ports are common findings for self-hosted tools. Decide whether testers receive an administrator account, one account per role (Admin, Editor, Viewer and any custom roles), or both. Role-specific accounts usually test access control more directly than an administrator view. Then fix the edition and authentication method. Open-source Grafana supports LDAP, generic OAuth, Entra ID, Okta, GitHub, GitLab, Google OAuth, auth proxy and JWT, while SAML, team sync, active sync and SCIM are limited to Grafana Enterprise and Grafana Cloud. The test plan must name exactly which of these are enabled, because each has its own login and provisioning paths.
Finally, state the topology. A single node and a high availability setup (two or more active-active servers behind a load balancer sharing one database) produce different test cases, including session handling across nodes, database-backed auth tokens, and alerting behavior that can send duplicate notifications if it is not configured. Ask whether the test will cover all nodes or one representative node, and whether the load balancer and proxy headers are included in the scope document. Confirm these details with your own team and the provider before the statement of work is signed, since they change both the effort and the findings the report can support.
Which testing standard fits your Grafana assessment
A broad penetration test uses the OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) as its method. WSTG v4.2 is the current stable release, and OWASP's project page says version 5.0 is in development, so ask your provider which version their methodology maps to and confirm it in the statement of work. WSTG v4.2 groups web application testing into 12 categories, from information gathering and configuration review through authentication, authorization, session management, input validation, business logic and client-side testing. For Grafana, the tester typically covers:
- Authentication and role mapping: whether login flows, token handling and group-to-role mapping can be bypassed or abused.
- Data source proxying: whether users can reach internal endpoints or credentials through the Grafana server.
- Plugins and sharing: how installed plugins behave and what shared dashboards or links expose.
- Configuration: the hardening settings the tester checks against the deployed instance.
- Retesting: confirming that each finding is fixed in the running system.
The output is a findings report listing issues by exception, with severity, evidence and remediation. It does not state that every control was checked and passed, so ask for a clear record of what was tested and what was out of scope.
An ASVS-based verification checks the application against the OWASP Application Security Verification Standard, version 5.0.0 (dated May 2025). ASVS has 17 requirement chapters, including V6 Authentication, V7 Session Management, V8 Authorization and V10 OAuth and OIDC, and defines three verification levels, L1 to L3, that increase in depth and complexity. OWASP's guidance is to start with L1 for the most critical concerns and move to higher levels according to the organization's and application's needs. Choose the level based on your risk profile and document the reason.
- Requirement-by-requirement coverage: every requirement in the chosen level is marked as passed, failed, not applicable or not tested.
- Report structure: the report includes scope, a summary of all requirements checked, the exceptions with guidance, and the requirements that do not apply.
- Documentation and source access: ASVS strongly encourages hybrid testing, which uses architecture documents, configuration and source where available.
- Limits of automation: scanners cannot fully verify many requirements, especially business logic and access control.
- Verifier independence: OWASP does not certify vendors, verifiers or software, and any claim of ASVS compliance is not endorsed by OWASP.
This route suits teams that need evidence mapped to a requirement list. Ask the provider how they will document requirements they did not test.
API-focused testing uses the OWASP API Security Top 10 2023 as its frame. It fits when the Grafana HTTP API is the main exposure, for example when service accounts, automation or external tools call it at scale. The list names API1 Broken Object Level Authorization, API2 Broken Authentication, API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization, API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption, API5 Broken Function Level Authorization, API6 Unrestricted Access to Sensitive Business Flows, API7 Server Side Request Forgery, API8 Security Misconfiguration, API9 Improper Inventory Management and API10 Unsafe Consumption of APIs. For Grafana, the tester typically checks:
- Object authorization: whether a user can read or change dashboards, folders or data sources they should not access by changing identifiers.
- Function authorization: whether admin-only endpoints respond to lower-privileged tokens.
- Token and service account scope: how API keys and service account tokens are issued, limited and revoked.
- Server-side request paths: whether data source or plugin features can be steered toward internal addresses.
- Inventory: whether the tester can list which endpoints are exposed, including older or undocumented ones.
The output is a set of API findings with reproduction steps. Ask whether the test will use the API documentation, account roles you supply and a test environment that mirrors production.
Test types and when each fits a Grafana instance
This table compares four test models for a self-hosted Grafana instance, showing what each one checks, what you must provide and when it fits. Read it by matching your main risk to a row, then confirm the client inputs with the testing partner before scoping. The main takeaway is that a black-box test alone rarely covers role mapping, data source proxying or sharing settings, so most instances need an authenticated or documentation-led component.
| Test type | What it checks | What the client must provide | When it fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| External black-box test | Exposed endpoints, login and session behavior, version disclosure and what an outsider can reach without credentials | Target hostnames, permitted test windows, source IP ranges for allow-listing and a named technical contact | The instance is internet-facing and you need to know what an unauthenticated attacker sees |
| Authenticated grey-box test | Role boundaries between a viewer and an editor account, dashboard and folder permissions, data source access through the proxy and plugin behavior | Two test accounts with agreed roles, a list of data sources in scope and an agreed description of expected permissions | Users sign in through an identity provider and the main risk is one user reaching another team's dashboards or data |
| Documentation-led hybrid test | Everything in the grey-box test plus a comparison of the live configuration against the documented intent, such as auth settings and hardening options | Architecture notes, the configuration file or its exported settings, identity provider mapping rules and the provisioning files in use | You want findings tied to design decisions, and you expect an assessor to need evidence per requirement, not only exceptions |
| Configuration review only | Settings for cookies, Content Security Policy, version disclosure, metrics endpoint authentication, DNS rebinding protection and database connection | Read access to the configuration, container or package definitions and the reverse proxy configuration | You need a fast check of hardening settings with no live attack testing, or you are preparing for a later test |
| Retest after fixes | Whether each earlier finding is closed, and whether the fix introduced a new problem in the same area | The original findings report, change records for each fix and a running instance in the same configuration | A remediation cycle is complete and you need evidence that the issues no longer reproduce |
How to run a Grafana security assessment from scoping to retest
This sequence turns a vague request to test Grafana into a written scope, a documented baseline of the running instance, verified test accounts, and a retest that proves each fix worked. Each step ends with a check so the client and the tester agree on what is done before moving on.
Agree written scope and rules of engagement
Before any traffic is sent, the client and the tester agree in writing on which Grafana hostnames, data sources, plugins and sharing features are in scope, which are excluded, the testing windows, the accounts and IP ranges the tester may use, and who to contact if something breaks. Include whether the test covers the Grafana HTTP interface only or also the backing database, the proxy and the identity provider. Ask the tester to state whether the work is black box, grey box or documentation-led, since the OWASP ASVS 5.0.0 guidance favors hybrid testing with documentation or source. Done when both parties have signed the scope and rules document and the emergency contact list is attached to it.
Collect version, install method and database type
The client provides the exact Grafana version, the installation method (Debian or Ubuntu package, RHEL or Fedora, SUSE, Docker, Helm chart on Kubernetes, or another route), the reverse proxy in front of it, and the database behind it. Confirm the database is MySQL 8.0 or later or PostgreSQL 12 or later. The Grafana installation docs state SQLite does not scale for production and that MySQL or PostgreSQL is required for production and high availability, so an instance on SQLite is a finding to record and explain, not a detail to skip. Check the version against the current release and patch list so the tester knows which advisories apply. Done when the version, deployment method and database are written into the test baseline document.
Export identity configuration and provisioning files
Collect the
grafana.inisettings for authentication, the[auth],[auth.generic_oauth],[auth.ldap]and[auth.proxy]sections as they apply, and the provisioning files for data sources, dashboards, plugins and alerting. Record which identity provider is in use. Note that the Grafana authentication docs say SAML, team sync, active sync and SCIM are available only in Grafana Enterprise and Grafana Cloud, so a SAML-based design on the open-source edition needs its own explanation. Remove or redact secret values before sharing files with the tester, and keep a secure channel for anything that must be sent unredacted. Done when the tester has the configuration files, the redaction log and a list of which settings the client believes are intentional.Create test accounts for each role
The client creates one test account per role the instance uses, such as viewer, editor, organization admin, server admin and any account tied to a team, folder permission or data source permission. For SSO-backed setups, the identity provider groups that feed role mapping are populated with test users in the same way. Record each account, the expected role, the expected team memberships and the expected folder and data source access. Then check the mapping: sign in as each test user and confirm the Grafana role and team membership match the expectation, and confirm a user removed from an identity group loses access on the next sign-in. Done when a mapping matrix shows expected versus actual access for every test account, and every mismatch is either fixed or logged for the tester.
Run the assessment against documented test areas
The tester works through the agreed areas: authentication and role mapping, authorization on dashboards, folders and data sources, data source proxying (including whether a user can reach internal endpoints through a data source), plugin behavior, sharing features such as snapshots and public dashboards, the session and cookie behavior, and the exposed endpoints. The OWASP WSTG v4.2 categories and OWASP Top 10 2025 entries provide a shared checklist, and the tester should note where automated scanning cannot prove access control or business logic. Each finding is recorded with the test case, the evidence, the affected version and the account used. Done when every in-scope area has either a result or a documented reason it was not tested.
Triage findings against the hardening settings
Map each finding to the Grafana security hardening settings and to the configuration the client intended. Check whether secure and SameSite cookies, the Content Security Policy, Trusted Types, version hiding, authentication on the metrics endpoint and domain verification against DNS rebinding are set as the hardening guidance recommends, and whether any gap is a configuration choice, a version problem or a design flaw. Assign severity and an owner for each item, and separate items that need a vendor patch from items the client can change now. Done when each finding has a severity, an owner, a fix type (configuration, patch, code, process or accepted risk with a named approver) and a link to its test evidence.
Fix findings and record the change
The client applies fixes through the same channel used for production changes, ideally through version-controlled provisioning or configuration management so a fix is repeatable. Patches follow the Grafana release cadence and should be tested in a non-production copy first. Record each change with the date, the person who made it, the configuration or version before and after, and the finding it addresses. Accepted risks are signed by the approver with a review date. Done when every fix has a change record and every accepted risk has a named approver and a review date.
Retest fixed items and issue the report
The tester repeats the original test cases for each fixed item, using the same test accounts and the same version and configuration as the fix, then checks for regressions in the areas near each change. Each retest records pass, fail or not fixed, with fresh evidence. The final report lists the scope, the tests run, all findings and their status, and the residual risk. If the client wants an ASVS-aligned view, the report should state the scope, summarize the requirements checked, list exceptions with guidance and note the requirements that do not apply, since ASVS 5.0.0 describes this structure for verification reports. Done when every finding is closed, accepted or open with an owner, and the client has the final report and the retest evidence.
Questions teams ask before commissioning a Grafana penetration test
What drives the cost of a Grafana penetration test?
Scope drives cost more than anything else: how many roles and authentication paths the tester must check, how many plugins and data sources are in use, how many integrations sit behind the proxy, and whether the test is black box, grey box or documentation-led. Each added role or plugin adds test cases, and each retest round adds effort after fixes. DeployOpen fixes the price in a written scope, so ask for the scope items that feed the quote: the role model, the plugin list with versions, the data sources, the sharing features in use and the number of retest rounds included. One-time costs cover the test, the report and the retest. Recurring costs appear only if you buy a retainer for continuous testing or periodic reassessment.
How long does a Grafana penetration test take from start to report?
Duration depends on the scope agreed in writing, the readiness of the test environment and how quickly your team answers questions and grants access. A test of a single instance with one identity provider and a few roles moves faster than one covering multiple organizations, custom plugins and a high availability setup. Delays usually come from waiting for test accounts, unclear change windows or fixes that are not ready for retest. Ask for the timeline in the statement of work, including the dates for the test window, the draft findings and the retest, and confirm them against your own change calendar.
What does our team need to provide before the test starts?
The tester needs enough information to avoid guessing and enough access to test real behavior. Prepare these inputs:
- An architecture diagram showing load balancers, the database (SQLite, MySQL or PostgreSQL), reverse proxies, the image rendering service and each data source connection
- Test accounts for each role, including viewer, editor, admin and any team or organization roles, plus an identity provider test tenant if SSO is in scope
- The Grafana version, installed plugins and the configuration file, with secrets redacted
- A change window, a rollback contact and a named technical contact for each system behind Grafana
- A written rule of engagement that covers testing hours, permitted traffic volume and which data sources may be queried
Confirm the exact format of each input during scoping.
Can our internal security team run a Grafana penetration test themselves?
Yes, an internal team can test its own Grafana instance, and many do. The trade-off is independence: an internal tester knows the environment well but may share assumptions with the people who built it, so findings can be missed. Many organizations use internal staff for routine checks and commission an external test for the release or audit that requires independent review. If your internal team tests, document the scope, keep the test plan and evidence, and have someone outside the build team review the results. Your auditor will decide whether that review satisfies its requirements.
What does a retest cover after fixes are applied?
A retest checks whether each reported finding is closed, using the same test cases that found it, and checks that the fix did not open a new issue in the same area. It does not repeat the full assessment unless the scope says so. Agree in advance how many retest rounds are included, what counts as closed (for example, a configuration change verified on the running instance rather than in a file), and how partially fixed findings are recorded. Plan a change window for each retest, and keep the version and configuration of the fixed system identical to the one retested.
Does a penetration test give us an ASVS or other certification?
No. A penetration test produces findings and a report, and it does not certify Grafana, your deployment or your organization. OWASP does not certify vendors, verifiers or software, and any claim of ASVS compliance is not endorsed by OWASP. If you need ASVS-based evidence, ask for a report structured around the verification level and requirements you choose, and then have an independent verifier or auditor assess it. Certification and attestation decisions belong to independent auditors and certification bodies, not to the firm that ran the test. DeployOpen prepares systems, controls and evidence for those assessments.
Which Grafana settings will the tester check?
Testers usually check the settings that expose users, sessions and data. Ask the tester to cover the security hardening options described in the Grafana documentation, including secure and SameSite cookies, the Content Security Policy, Trusted Types, hiding the version from unauthenticated users, authentication on the metrics endpoint and domain verification against DNS rebinding. They should also check anonymous access, external sharing and snapshots, data source proxying, and plugin loading. Confirm this list in writing, because the exact set depends on your version and configuration.
Hardening settings a tester will check first
Grafana's security hardening documentation names a short list of settings that testers check early because they are quick to verify and often left at defaults. Each one shows up in the browser, in HTTP responses or in how the server answers a crafted request. A tester confirms the behavior, not only the configuration file, so the findings reflect what an attacker would actually see.
Secure and SameSite cookies
Session cookies should carry the Secure flag so they are sent only over HTTPS, and a SameSite attribute to limit cross-site requests. Testers check the Set-Cookie headers on login and on authenticated pages, then confirm that the cookies are not returned over plain HTTP. A missing flag on a session cookie is a finding even when TLS is in place, because a downgrade or an insecure redirect can expose it.
Content Security Policy
A Content Security Policy tells the browser which scripts, styles and frames may load, which limits the impact of cross-site scripting in dashboards, panels and text content. Testers read the header actually returned on dashboard pages and try to inject content through panel text, annotations and data source labels. A policy that is absent, or that allows broad script sources, weakens the defense even when input handling looks sound.
Trusted Types
Trusted Types restricts which strings can reach dangerous DOM sinks, so injected markup is blocked by the browser rather than trusted by the application. Testers confirm that the setting is active in the served pages and check whether custom panels or plugins break or bypass it. Plugins that assign raw HTML are the usual place where the protection fails, so the plugin inventory belongs in the same test.
Hidden version and metrics authentication
Unauthenticated users should not be able to read the Grafana version, which helps an attacker pick known vulnerabilities. The metrics endpoint should also require authentication, because it can expose internal names, data source details and usage. Testers request the login page, the health and metrics paths without a session, and compare the responses with an authenticated request to confirm what leaks.
Domain verification against DNS rebinding
Domain verification stops a DNS rebinding attack, where a hostile site makes a victim's browser send requests to an internal Grafana address under a different host name. Testers send requests with unexpected Host values and from a test domain that resolves to the internal address, then check whether Grafana rejects them. The result depends on the exact domain and proxy configuration, so the test should use the production hostnames and load balancer path.
Retesting Grafana after fixes and keeping results current
A retest confirms that each fix closes the specific finding it was raised against, using the same test case, the same account roles and the same data source path that produced the original result. Retest against the original finding, not against a general sense that the instance is healthier. Record the finding ID, the evidence before and after, and the Grafana version and plugin versions tested, so the closure can be checked later. Findings that touched role mapping, the data source proxy or sharing settings should be retested with users in each role, because a fix that blocks an editor may also block a viewer who should still see a dashboard.
Patch releases and minor upgrades can change behavior that a test already signed off. Grafana's upgrade guidance describes patch releases at least monthly and minor releases every other month, and each minor release is supported for 9 months. Each of those upgrades can alter default cookie handling, Content Security Policy headers, plugin loading or API responses, so a hardening setting that passed in one version should be re-checked after it. Ask your team to confirm which upgrade path they will follow, and whether a short regression pass against the hardening checks is part of each upgrade change window.
Provisioning is the most practical way to keep hardening settings from drifting. Data sources, dashboards, plugins and alerting resources defined in YAML or JSON files are loaded at startup, so the reviewed configuration is the one the tester saw. Store those files under version control and attach each change to a review. Plan a full retest after every major upgrade and after any plugin is added, updated or removed, since plugins run with access to the same data sources and browser contexts. Confirm with your tester whether retests are fixed-scope work or part of a retainer, and agree the trigger events in writing before the first assessment closes.
How DeployOpen scopes, tests and supports Grafana security work
DeployOpen plans, implements, hardens, documents and supports self-hosted open-source platforms inside your own infrastructure, and runs security testing across applications, APIs and infrastructure. For Grafana, we agree a written scope first, test the instance against that scope, and hand over findings with a retest path once fixes are in place.
How we scope
- The written scope names which Grafana instances, data sources, plugins and sharing features are in and out of the test.
- Scope records the authentication setup, role mapping and whether the instance runs on SQLite, MySQL or PostgreSQL.
- Engagements are fixed-scope, with deliverables and timelines agreed in writing before testing starts.
How we test
- Testing covers authentication, role mapping, data source proxying, plugin behavior and sharing features on the instance.
- Testers check the hardening settings in scope, such as cookie flags, Content Security Policy and metrics endpoint authentication.
- Automated scanning is combined with manual review of access control and business logic, which tools verify poorly.
How we hand over
- Findings are documented with reproduction steps, affected settings and guidance on resolving each issue.
- The report notes which checks passed, which were out of scope and which did not apply to your configuration.
- A retest of agreed findings after fixes confirms whether each issue is closed on your running instance.
How we support
- Ongoing support, upgrades and continuous testing are available as retainers after the initial assessment.
- Retainers can cover retesting after Grafana patch releases and changes to plugins or authentication settings.
- Fixes and testing run inside your cloud accounts, data centers or restricted networks, with your team kept informed.
