Skip to content

GHSA-8c7q-86fq-vvmh BIT-mlflow-2026-2651 CVE-2026-2651 PYSEC-2026-2220

MLflow allows unauthorized access to multipart upload endpoints when the `--serve-artifacts` mode is enabled

Critical PyPI
Severity
9.0 / 10
Critical · CVSS 3.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.34%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 28.08% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-1220 Insufficient Granularity of Access Control
CWE-862 Missing Authorization
Fix
3.10.0
Upgrade mlflow to this version or later

Description

A vulnerability in MLflow versions <=3.10.1.dev0 allows unauthorized access to multipart upload (MPU) endpoints when the --serve-artifacts mode is enabled. The authorization logic does not enforce resource-level permission checks for /mlflow-artifacts/mpu/* endpoints, enabling attackers to overwrite artifacts belonging to other users. This can lead to unauthorized cross-user writes, model supply chain poisoning, and arbitrary code execution when compromised models are loaded. The issue is resolved in version 3.10.0.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
mlflow
< 3.10.0
3.10.0
mlflow
< 3.11.0rc0
3.11.0rc0

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

mlflow PyPI → 3.10.0

pip
pip install --upgrade "mlflow>=3.10.0"
poetry
poetry add "mlflow>=3.10.0"
uv
uv add "mlflow>=3.10.0"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.0 9.0

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-1220: Insufficient Granularity of Access Control

The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation, Testing: Access-control-policy protections must be reviewed for design inconsistency and common weaknesses. Access-control-policy definition and programming flow must be tested in pre-silicon, post-silicon testing.

CWE-862: Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
  • Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
  • System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-7gwp-5pfp-969j
MLflow: Unauthenticated full-read SSRF in webhook delivery: _validate_webhook_url bypassed via unvalidated HTTP redirects (and DNS rebinding)
Critical Known exploited Also affects mlflow
GHSA-26p8-2jq9-3vq9
MLflow vulnerable to remote code execution on unauthenticated servers via third-party scorer deserialization importing caller-placed artifact modules
Critical Also affects mlflow
GHSA-j7qq-vr8c-xvw3
MLflow CrewAI autologging records LLM provider API keys in logged trace spans
Medium Also affects mlflow
GHSA-m65p-9j7q-6w33
MLflow vulnerable to arbitrary file read on unauthenticated servers via prompt model version source
High Also affects mlflow
GHSA-2wqp-q3c6-ccj5
MLflow: SSRF on unauthenticated MLflow servers via third-party scorer kwargs in the scorer invoke, register, and GenAI evaluate endpoints
Medium Also affects mlflow
GHSA-wqmh-qccw-pqwf
MLflow FileStore trace IDs allow path traversal and arbitrary file writes
High Also affects mlflow
GHSA-gqvg-gmmx-x4hm
MLFLOW_ALLOW_PICKLE_DESERIALIZATION=False safety control bypassed by mlflow.statsmodels flavor — RCE via crafted model artifact
High Also affects mlflow
GHSA-h7x2-h6g9-p789
MLflow AI Gateway permits SSRF through an unvalidated api_base
High Also affects mlflow
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor