Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2026-4370· NVD / CVE Program· CNA canonical

Improper TLS Client/Server authentication and certificate verification on Database Cluster

A vulnerability was identified in Juju from version 3.2.0 until 3.6.19 and from version 4.0 until 4.0.4, where the internal Dqlite database cluster fails to perform proper TLS client and server authentication. Specifically, the Juju controller's database endpoint does not validate client certificates when a new node attempts to join the cluster. An unauthenticated attacker with network reachability to the Juju controller's Dqlite port can exploit this flaw to join the database cluster. Once joined, the attacker gains full read and write access to the underlying database, allowing for total data compromise.

CriticalCVSS 10.0 · v3.1—No exploit Fix available
Published
Apr 1, 2026
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.4% · 33th 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

40

Plan

Add it to your regular patch cycle.

CVSS
40 / 40 · 10.0 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.4%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
proof of concept
Automatable
yes
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · canonical
10.0
NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

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

Affected systems

VendorProduct
canonicaljuju

Affected versions

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

  • canonical juju3.2.0 and later · before 3.6.20
  • canonical juju4.0 and later · before 4.0.5

Versions reported by the vendor

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

  • Canonical Juju

    • 3.2.0 and later · before 3.6.20affected · semver
    • 4.0 and later · before 4.0.4affected · semver

Package-level exposure

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

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
Gogithub.com/juju/jujuup to and including 0.0.0-20260401092550-1c1ac1922b57—
Gogithub.com/juju/jujuall versions—

Same product

canonical: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2017-9232Juju before 1.25.12, 2.0.x before 2.0.4, and 2.1.x before 2.1.3 uses a UNIX domain socket without setting appropriate permissions, allowing
    54Plan
  • CVE-2026-32693Unauthorized access to Kubernetes secrets in Juju
    35Monitor
  • CVE-2025-0928Arbitrary executable upload via authenticated endpoint
    35Monitor
  • CVE-2024-7558JUJU_CONTEXT_ID is a predictable authentication secret.
    32Monitor
  • CVE-2015-1316Juju Joyent provider uploads user's private ssh key by default
    30Monitor
  • CVE-2025-68153Juju: Resource poisoning
    28Monitor

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
Canonical Juju3.6.20Vendor (CNA)
Canonical Juju4.0.4Vendor (CNA)

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.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

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

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.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted

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

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

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVSS vector

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

nvd-secondary

Root cause

A certificate validation error is silently swallowed instead of terminating the connection. Often, code added for a test environment makes its way into production.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-295 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

kotlin
override fun checkServerTrusted(chain: Array<X509Certificate>, type: String) {  // Left empty for the test environment}

Fixed

kotlin
val client = OkHttpClient.Builder()  .certificatePinner(    CertificatePinner.Builder()      .add("api.sirius.example", "sha256/…")      .build()  ).build()

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

—

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; 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

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

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

All records