CVE-2026-31228
Description
A flaw was found in the Adversarial Robustness Toolbox (ART), specifically within its Kubeflow component. The robustness evaluation function for PyTorch models uses the eval() function to dynamically evaluate user-supplied strings for the LossFn and Optimizer parameters without proper sanitization. A remote attacker can exploit this by providing a specially crafted string containing arbitrary Python code, leading to remote code execution and complete compromise of the system running the ART evaluation.
Statement
This is an Important remote code execution flaw in the Adversarial Robustness Toolbox (ART) Kubeflow component, as deployed in Red Hat OpenShift AI. The vulnerability arises from the unsafe use of eval() on unsanitized user-supplied strings within the robustness evaluation function for PyTorch models. An attacker can leverage this to execute arbitrary Python code, leading to a complete compromise of the affected system.
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 | 8.8 | N/A | 9.8 |
| Attack Vector | Network | N/A | Network |
| Attack Complexity | Low | N/A | Low |
| Privileges Required | Low | N/A | None |
| User Interaction | None | N/A | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | N/A | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | High | N/A | High |
| Integrity Impact | High | N/A | High |
| Availability Impact | High | N/A | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Access Control
Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism
In some cases, injectable code controls authentication; this may lead to a remote vulnerability.
Access Control
Technical Impact: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
Injected code can access resources that the attacker is directly prevented from accessing.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
When a product allows a user's input to contain code syntax, it might be possible for an attacker to craft the code in such a way that it will alter the intended control flow of the product. As a result, code injection can often result in the execution of arbitrary code. Code injection attacks can also lead to loss of data integrity in nearly all cases, since the control-plane data injected is always incidental to data recall or writing.
Non-Repudiation
Technical Impact: Hide Activities
Often the actions performed by injected control code are unlogged.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
