CVE-2026-32692: Unauthorized update of out-of-scope Vault secrets
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: 0.16% (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: Canonical Juju 3.6.19.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Canonical Juju 3.6.19 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
An authorization bypass vulnerability in the Vault secrets back-end implementation of Juju versions 3.1.6 through 3.6.18 allows an authenticated unit agent to perform unauthorized updates to secret revisions. With sufficient information, an attacker can poison any existing secret revision within the scope of that Vault secret back-end.
- Published
- Mar 18, 2026
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.1% · 6th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-285
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.1%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 6.5
- CNA · canonical
- 7.6
- 1.1 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L
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.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
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 helpAffected 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.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| canonical | juju | cpe:2.3:a:canonical:juju |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- canonical juju3.1.6 and later · before 3.6.19
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
- 3.1.6 and later · before 3.6.19affected · semver
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/juju/juju | from 0.0.0-20230919230135-f6a66aa91eec · before 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec | 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec |
Same product
canonical: all recordsOther 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 60This week
- CVE-2026-4370Improper TLS Client/Server authentication and certificate verification on Database Cluster40Plan
- CVE-2026-32693Unauthorized access to Kubernetes secrets in Juju35Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-1237Jan 28, 2026 · Vulnerable cross-model authorization in juju.8Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-32691Mar 18, 2026 · Timing ownership claim attack on new external back-end secrets21Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-32694Mar 18, 2026 · Insecure Direct Object Reference attack via predictable secret ID in Juju26Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Canonical Juju | 3.6.19 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Go:github.com/juju/juju | 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec | Package 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.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Harry Pidcockfinder
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2025-0928253 days apartArbitrary executable upload via authenticated endpoint35Monitor
- CVE-2026-541223 days apartJuju CloudSpec API could leak senstive information26Monitor
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
- none
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-285 · Improper AuthorizationCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLsCAPEC-1likelihood: High · High
- Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-104likelihood: Medium · High
- Directory IndexingCAPEC-127likelihood: High · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Malicious FilesCAPEC-17likelihood: High · Very High
- Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data TokensCAPEC-39likelihood: High · Medium
- Bypassing ATA Password SecurityCAPEC-402
- Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-45likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
- Data from Local SystemT1005
- Query RegistryT1012
- File and Directory DiscoveryT1083
- Access Token Manipulation:Token Impersonation/TheftT1134.001
- Use Alternate Authentication Material:Web Session CookieT1550.004
- Unsecured Credentials: Credentials in RegistryT1552.002
- Impair Defenses:Impair Command History LoggingT1562.003
- Data Manipulation: Transmitted Data ManipulationT1565.002
- Hijack Execution Flow: Executable Installer File Permissions WeaknessT1574.005
- Hijack Execution Flow:Dynamic Linker HijackingT1574.006
- Hijack Execution Flow:Path Interception by PATH Environment VariableT1574.007
- Hijack Execution Flow: ServicesFile Permissions WeaknessT1574.010
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.