CVE Intelligence
High Info disclosure exploit reference

CVE-2025-15381 — Unauthorized Access to Tracing and Assessment Endpoints in mlflow/mlflow

In the latest version of mlflow/mlflow, when the `basic-auth` app is enabled, tracing and assessment endpoints are not protected by permission validators. This allows any authenticated user, including those with `NO_PERMISSIONS` on the experiment, to read trace information and create assessments for traces they should not have access to. This vulnerability impacts confidentiality by exposing trace metadata and integrity by allowing unauthorized creation of assessments. Deployments using `mlflow server --app-name=basic-auth` are affected.

Published Mar 27, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: @huntr_ai

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+4
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.33%
ahead of 25% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Lfprojects
Mlflow
CVSS base
7.1
High · 4 source(s)
Prioritization reference: 8.1 provisional

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Lfprojects Mlflow, Mlflow Mlflow).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (info disclosure), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Lfprojects Mlflow versions not specified by the source Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Mlflow Mlflow ≤ latest Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

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

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
8.1 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 5.2 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.1 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 4.2 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.1 CVSS 3.0 High 2.8 5.2 security@huntr.dev via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.1 CVSS 3.0 High — — @huntr_ai via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 8.1 (0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-200 · Exposure of Sensitive Information

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.33%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Look for anomalous data read/export volumes and access to sensitive records.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsauthentication logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · mlflow/mlflow/mlflow
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.1
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Mar 27, 2026 · @huntr_ai

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Lfprojects
every CVE for this vendor
Info disclosure
same class
CWE-200
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Critical CVE-2026-64849 MLflow Server-Side Request Forgery Vulnerability KEV Aug 17, 2026
  • High CVE-2026-8147 Authorization Bypass in mlflow/mlflow Jul 2, 2026
  • High CVE-2026-13484 MLflow Experiment-scoped Label Schema CRUD API authorization Jun 28, 2026
  • Low CVE-2026-10803 MLflow Dataset Digest Computation digest_utils.py mlflow.data.digest_utils weak hash Jun 4, 2026
  • High CVE-2026-4035 Environment Variable Resolution Vulnerability in mlflow/mlflow Jun 3, 2026
  • Medium CVE-2026-3198 Improper Access Control in mlflow/mlflow Jun 2, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-15381 is "Unauthorized Access to Tracing and Assessment Endpoints in mlflow/mlflow", rated High. It affects Mlflow (Lfprojects); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.33% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.