Temporal Technologies, Inc. vulnerabilities
Published CVEs affecting Temporal Technologies, Inc. products: 5 record(s), with severity, exploitation and fixes.
CVE-2026-108126
Medium · 6.0
CWE-639 Oct 15, 2026
temporal-proxy payload decryption is not bound to the request namespace
temporal-proxy 0.2.0 through 0.8.0 does not bind encrypted payloads to the namespace they were encrypted for. When payload encryption is enabled, the proxy chooses the decryption key by an identifier stored in the payload rather than by the namespace of the request, and nothing in the ciphertext records that namespace. A caller whom the proxy authorizes only for namespace B, and who has obtained an encrypted payload from namespace A, can therefore have the proxy decrypt it. In 0.8.0, the caller can submit the payload to the codec server's /decode endpoint. In every affected version, a caller who can also write to namespace B on the Temporal server directly can place the payload there and read it back through the proxy. This holds whether namespaces share the default key or each has its own, because a single proxy holds every key it is configured with. The issue does not give the attacker encrypted payloads they could not already obtain, and does not allow encrypted payloads to be modified.
CVE-2026-89140
Medium · 6.0
CWE-639 Oct 12, 2026
Temporal Server internal completion callbacks are not bound to their namespace, allowing cross-namespace changes to Scheduler V2 schedule state
Temporal Server does not bind internal completion callbacks to the namespace that attached them, which allows an authenticated caller with write permission in one namespace to alter Scheduler V2 schedule state in another namespace. The callback address temporal://internal is reserved for callbacks that Scheduler V2 attaches to the Workflows it starts. In affected releases, any authenticated caller could attach a callback with that address to a Workflow start request, the address was exempt from the component.callbacks.allowedAddresses allowlist, and the History service delivered the callback to the component its token named, in whatever namespace that was, without authorizing the original caller there. When the forged completion matches an action a target schedule is running, the schedule records the action as completed while its Workflow still runs, which can defeat an overlap policy such as SKIP, and passes caller-controlled data to the next scheduled Workflow as its last completion result. A forged failure may also pause a schedule configured to pause on failure. A forgery requires the target namespace identifier, the schedule identifier, and the identity and timing of a running action. No disclosure of Workflow payloads or history was identified. Only namespaces that hold Scheduler V2 schedules can be targeted; Scheduler V2 is off by default, and existing Scheduler V2 schedules remain targets after the settings that create them are turned off.
CVE-2026-104355
High · 7.0
CWE-863 Oct 12, 2026
Temporal Server applies inbound namespace replication from a connected peer cluster to local namespaces
A connected peer cluster can modify a Temporal Server cluster's local namespaces, which are never replicated to that peer, because the receiving cluster applies inbound namespace replication updates to them. In a multi-cluster deployment, each cluster pulls replication tasks from the remote clusters an administrator has registered with connection enabled; the sending side excludes local namespaces, but the receiving side does not apply the same rule. When an inbound task names an existing namespace, the server checks at most that the namespace identifiers match, then overwrites its state, description, owner, retention, archival settings, and cluster list, and its active cluster when the task carries a higher failover version, without checking that the namespace is global. A party that controls a registered peer's replies, by operating or compromising it, can therefore change any local namespace whose name and identifier it can supply, without any credential on the receiving cluster: for example, marking it Deprecated, making the peer its active cluster, and shortening its retention, after which new Workflow starts in that namespace fail. Local namespaces include the built-in temporal-system namespace. Namespace metadata the History service refreshes from the peer while processing its history replication tasks passes through the same logic. A cluster with no remote cluster registered with connection enabled is not exposed.
CVE-2026-5724
Medium · 6.3
CWE-306 Apr 10, 2026
Missing Authentication on Streaming gRPC Replication Endpoint
The frontend gRPC server's streaming interceptor chain did not include the authorization interceptor. When a ClaimMapper and Authorizer are configured, unary RPCs enforce authentication and authorization, but the streaming AdminService/StreamWorkflowReplicationMessages endpoint accepted requests without credentials. This endpoint is registered on the same port as WorkflowService and cannot be disabled independently. An attacker with network access to the frontend port could open the replication stream without authentication. Data exfiltration is possible, but only when a configured replication target is correctly configured and the attacker has knowledge of the cluster configuration, as the history service validates cluster IDs and peer membership before returning replication data.
The fix was applied per release line: it is present in 1.28.4, 1.29.6, 1.30.4, 1.31.2, and 1.32.0 and later releases on each line. Releases 1.31.0 and 1.31.1 do not contain the fix and are affected.
Temporal Cloud is not affected.
CVE-2026-5199
Low · 2.3
CWE-639 Apr 1, 2026
Cross Namespace Access via Batch Operation
A writer role user in an attacker-controlled namespace could signal, delete, and reset workflows or activities in a victim namespace on the same cluster. Exploitation requires the attacker to know or guess specific victim workflow ID(s) and, for signal operations, signal names. This was due to a bug introduced in Temporal Server v1.29.0 which inadvertently allowed an attacker to control the namespace name value instead of using the server's own trusted name value within the batch activity code. The batch activity validated the namespace ID but did not cross-check the namespace name against the worker's bound namespace, allowing the per-namespace worker's privileged credentials to operate on an arbitrary namespace. Exploitation requires a server configuration where internal components have cross-namespace authorization, such as deployment of the internal-frontend service or equivalent TLS-based authorization for internal identities.
This vulnerability also impacted Temporal Cloud when the attacker and victim namespaces were on the same cell, with the same preconditions as self-hosted clusters.