CVE-2026-116690
Description
A flaw was found in MLflow. Due to improper path validation during model version creation, the application allows local file paths to be assigned as model artifact locations. A remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability by submitting a server-local path and retrieving it through the artifact interface to read arbitrary files accessible to the server process, resulting in sensitive information disclosure.
Statement
This vulnerability is rated as an Important severity flaw because an attacker with network access to the MLflow tracking service can read arbitrary files from the server container without requiring administrative credentials. In Red Hat OpenShift AI (RHOAI), MLflow deployments that allow model registry interactions expose sensitive environment configuration, process memory files, or credential databases to any caller able to submit prompt-based model versions. The issue is confined to unauthorized information disclosure and does not provide an attacker with file modification capabilities or arbitrary code execution.
Mitigation
--- CME Mitigation Guidance (2026-11-03) ---
Disclaimer: The following mitigation solutions are provided as a courtesy, pending the application of an official patch. This content was generated utilizing AI tools in conjunction with data from https://cmetaxonomy.org. Customers are advised to independently evaluate and test these temporary mitigations within their own infrastructure.
The highest-value action is to eliminate local filesystem path assignment in MLflow model registry creation by validating and restricting artifact sources to approved URI schemes: upgrade to MLflow 3.17.0 (or the corresponding fixed Red Hat builds), which reject schemeless sources for prompt model versions unless they match known internal placeholders, classify Windows drive paths using get_uri_scheme, and require the prompt tag value to explicitly equal 'true', closing all 4 injection vectors (schemeless relative paths, Windows drive-letter paths, directory traversal sequences, prompt tag manipulation). Until patched, this is a concern on MLflow tracking server deployments accessible over network, including unauthenticated servers and basic-auth environments allowing model version creation, so Restrict network access to the MLflow tracking server REST API, require authentication, restrict privileges to create registered model versions, and audit stored model versions for non-placeholder source paths. As a compensating measure, Restrict path characters and enforce an allowlist of permitted artifact URI schemes with default-deny to reject schemeless or local file references, Inspect inbound HTTP API requests using a web application firewall to detect and block directory traversal sequences and local path patterns sent to model version endpoints, Configure auditd to monitor and alert on unexpected system file read operations performed by the MLflow process, and Use Falco or eBPF runtime security to detect anomalous read access to sensitive filesystem locations initiated by the containerized MLflow server process. These controls limit blast radius and contain exploitation, but they do not fix the underlying improper path validation defect — apply the upstream patch to fully remediate.
Highest-impact CME: CME-1301 Path Traversal Prevention (Canonicalization) (high)
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert:Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 7.5 | N/A | 7.5 |
| Attack Vector | Network | N/A | Network |
| Attack Complexity | Low | N/A | Low |
| Privileges Required | None | N/A | None |
| User Interaction | None | N/A | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | N/A | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | High | N/A | High |
| Integrity Impact | None | N/A | None |
| Availability Impact | None | N/A | None |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
The attacker may be able to create or overwrite critical files that are used to execute code, such as programs or libraries.
Integrity
Technical Impact: Modify Files or Directories
The attacker may be able to overwrite or create critical files, such as programs, libraries, or important data. If the targeted file is used for a security mechanism, then the attacker may be able to bypass that mechanism. For example, appending a new account at the end of a password file may allow an attacker to bypass authentication.
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Files or Directories
The attacker may be able to read the contents of unexpected files and expose sensitive data. If the targeted file is used for a security mechanism, then the attacker may be able to bypass that mechanism. For example, by reading a password file, the attacker could conduct brute force password guessing attacks in order to break into an account on the system.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
The attacker may be able to overwrite, delete, or corrupt unexpected critical files such as programs, libraries, or important data. This may prevent the product from working at all and in the case of protection mechanisms such as authentication, it has the potential to lock out product users.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
