Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2026-27900· NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

Terraform Provider Debug Logs Vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure

The Terraform Provider for Linode versions prior to v3.9.0 logged sensitive information including some passwords, StackScript content, and object storage data in debug logs without redaction. Provider debug logging is not enabled by default. This issue is exposed when debug/provider logs are explicitly enabled (for example in local troubleshooting, CI/CD jobs, or centralized log collection). If enabled, sensitive values may be written to logs and then retained, shared, or exported beyond the original execution environment. An authenticated user with access to provider debug logs (through log aggregation systems, CI/CD pipelines, or debug output) would thus be able to extract these sensitive credentials. Versions 3.9.0 and later sanitize debug logs by logging only non-sensitive metadata such as labels, regions, and resource IDs while redacting credentials, tokens, keys, scripts, and other sensitive content. Some other mitigations and workarounds are available. Disable Terraform/provider debug logging or set it to `WARN` level or above, restrict access to existing and historical logs, purge/retention-trim logs that may contain sensitive values, and/or rotate potentially exposed secrets/credentials.

HighCVSS 7.7 · v3.1—No exploit Fix available
Published
Feb 25, 2026
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.6% · 46th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

30

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
30 / 40 · 7.7 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.6%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
7.7
CNA · GitHub_M
5.0
2.7 point gap

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

VendorProduct
terraformlinode provider

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • terraform linode providerbefore 3.9.0

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • linode terraform-provider-linode

    • < 3.9.0affected

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
Gogithub.com/linode/terraform-provider-linodeup to and including 1.30.0—
Gogithub.com/linode/terraform-provider-linodeall versions—
Gogithub.com/linode/terraform-provider-linode/v2up to and including 2.41.2—
Gogithub.com/linode/terraform-provider-linode/v2all versions—
Gogithub.com/linode/terraform-provider-linode/v3before 3.9.03.9.0

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
Go:github.com/linode/terraform-provider-linode/v33.9.0Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • A low-privileged account is enough.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
none
Availability
none

Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
None
Availability impact
None

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

nvd-primary

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

All records