CVE-2026-71211
Description
A flaw was found in MLflow's AI Gateway where an unvalidated api_base value in a gateway secret could lead to a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. An authenticated user, even with read-only privileges, can create a secret with an internal network address. This allows the gateway proxy endpoint to make requests to internal systems, potentially exposing sensitive information such as cloud-instance Identity and Access Management (IAM) credentials.
Statement
This flaw has a Moderate impact on Red Hat OpenShift AI, which ships MLflow. MLflow's AI Gateway stores an api_base value supplied when creating a gateway secret without validating its scheme, host, or IP range, and the gateway proxy endpoint then issues a request to that address on behalf of the caller and returns the response. Because the CreateGatewaySecret action is not gated by any specific permission scope, any authenticated user — including read-only accounts — can point a secret at an internal address (such as a cloud metadata service) and read the response, potentially disclosing sensitive information such as cloud-instance IAM credentials. Only deployments that run the MLflow AI Gateway server are exposed; images that bundle MLflow solely as a client library for experiment tracking do not reach the affected code path.
Mitigation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
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 | 6.5 | N/A | 7.1 |
| Attack Vector | Network | N/A | Network |
| Attack Complexity | Low | N/A | Low |
| Privileges Required | Low | N/A | Low |
| User Interaction | None | N/A | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | N/A | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | High | N/A | High |
| Integrity Impact | None | N/A | Low |
| Availability Impact | None | N/A | None |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Application Data
Integrity
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Access Control
Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism
By providing URLs to unexpected hosts or ports, attackers can make it appear that the server is sending the request, possibly bypassing access controls such as firewalls that prevent the attackers from accessing the URLs directly. The server can be used as a proxy to conduct port scanning of hosts in internal networks, use other URLs such as that can access documents on the system (using file://), or use other protocols such as gopher:// or tftp://, which may provide greater control over the contents of requests.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
