Skip to content
Noroxi
NVD / CVE Program· CNA @huntr_ai

CVE-2026-2734: Authorization Bypass in SearchModelVersions in mlflow/mlflow

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 26/100)

  • The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
  • Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.44% (FIRST EPSS).
  • 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.
  • Fixed version: mlflow (PyPI) 3.10.0.

Low priority for now. Upgrade to mlflow (PyPI) 3.10.0 or later.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

In mlflow/mlflow versions up to 3.9.0, the `SearchModelVersions` REST API endpoint and the `mlflowSearchModelVersions` GraphQL query lack proper per-model authorization checks when basic authentication is enabled. This allows any authenticated user to enumerate all model versions across all registered models, regardless of their permission level. The issue arises due to the absence of `SearchModelVersions` in the `BEFORE_REQUEST_VALIDATORS` and `AFTER_REQUEST_HANDLERS` for the REST API, and its omission from `GraphQLAuthorizationMiddleware.PROTECTED_FIELDS` for GraphQL. This vulnerability can expose sensitive information such as model names, version descriptions, source URIs, tags, and other metadata, potentially revealing proprietary or confidential details in multi-tenant environments. The issue is resolved in version 3.10.0.

MediumCVSS 6.5 · v3.0—No exploit Fix available
Published
May 21, 2026
Updated
Jul 23, 2026
EPSS
0.4% · 38th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

26

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.4%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
proof of concept
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · @huntr_ai
6.5
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.

Get told when this record changes

  • Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
  • No public exploit code on record
  • A fix has been released

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Follow CVE-2026-2734

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Add your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week (1 domain)
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
  • All your scans in one panel: findings, what changed in the last scan, a report per domain or per client (PDF, share link)
All free tools

Sign up with email · Have an account? Sign in

Free account, no card. Unfollow any time.

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

VendorProduct
lfprojectsmlflow

Affected versions

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

  • lfprojects mlflowbefore 3.10.0

Versions reported by the vendor

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

  • mlflow mlflow/mlflow

    • unspecified and later · before 3.10.0affected

Package-level exposure

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

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
PyPImlflowbefore 3.10.03.10.0

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2026-64849MLflow: Unauthenticated full-read SSRF in webhook delivery: _validate_webhook_url bypassed via unvalidated HTTP redirects (and DNS rebinding)KEV
    70This week
  • CVE-2023-3765Absolute Path Traversal in mlflow/mlflow
    60This week
  • CVE-2023-1177Path Traversal: '\..\filename' in mlflow/mlflow
    60This week

Published before and after this one in the same product

  • ← EarlierCVE-2026-4137May 18, 2026 · Incomplete Fix for CVE-2025-10279: Insecure Temporary Directory Permissions in mlflow/mlflow
    31Monitor
  • ← EarlierCVE-2026-2611May 19, 2026 · Improper Origin Validation in mlflow/mlflow
    38Monitor
  • Later →CVE-2026-2651May 25, 2026 · Missing Authorization Validation in mlflow/mlflow
    36Monitor

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
PyPI:mlflow3.10.0Package 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.

No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).

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.

  • CVE-2026-814742 days apartAuthorization Bypass in mlflow/mlflow
    32Monitor
  • CVE-2026-319812 days apartImproper Access Control in mlflow/mlflow
    26Monitor

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

CVSS vector

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

nvd-secondary

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

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

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records