CVE-2026-64849: MLflow Server-Side Request Forgery Vulnerability
- Is it exploited?
Yes. CISA added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on , 2 days after the CVE record was published.
- How likely is exploitation in the next 30 days?
- 10%
EPSS score, percentile 95.6 of all scored records
- How severe?
- 9.3 Critical
CVSS v3.1 base score, given by the CNA
- What should I do?
CISA deadline . Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions … Full text
The CVE record links no vendor advisory, patch or mitigation.
- Which versions are affected?
Affected
- >= 3.3.0, < 3.15.0
Source: CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, 2026.10.28, as of ; FIRST Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), v2026.06.15, as of ; CVE List V5 (CVE Program), cve_2026-10-28_0000Z, as of . About the data.
What to do
Required action, set by CISA
Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines.
CISA due date for this action: .
Advisories and patches
The CVE record links no vendor advisory, patch or mitigation.
Linked from CISA's catalog entry
- https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/pull/24258
- https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/issues/24179
- https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk
- https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-implementation-guidance-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk
- https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-64849
Affected products and versions
As listed in the CVE record.
| Status | Versions |
|---|---|
| Affected | >= 3.3.0, < 3.15.0 |
Source: CVE List V5 (CVE Program), cve_2026-10-28_0000Z, as of . About the data.
About this vulnerability
MLflow contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability that can allow attackers to reach internal or cloud metadata services and receive response_status and response_body.
Summary: CISA's KEV catalog, as of .
- CISA added CVE-2026-64849 to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog on 19 Aug 2026.
- CISA's ransomware flag for this entry is "Unknown": no evidence of ransomware use in the catalog, which is not proof of none.
- The due date CISA sets for the required action is 2 Sep 2026.
- The CVE record was published on 17 Aug 2026, 2 days before it was added to KEV.
- The CVE record carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.3 (Critical), given by its CNA.
- FIRST's EPSS model puts the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days at 10% (percentile 95.6), as of 28 Oct 2026.
- CISA's SSVC assessment in the CVE record: exploitation active, automatable yes, technical impact partial.
Source: CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, 2026.10.28, as of ; CVE List V5 (CVE Program), cve_2026-10-28_0000Z, as of ; FIRST Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), v2026.06.15, as of . About the data.
Description
MLflow: Unauthenticated full-read SSRF in webhook delivery: _validate_webhook_url bypassed via unvalidated HTTP redirects (and DNS rebinding)
MLflow is an open source AI engineering platform for agents, large language models, and machine learning models. Starting in 3.3.0 and prior to 3.15.0, the unauthenticated POST /api/2.0/mlflow/webhooks/{id}/test endpoint calls _validate_webhook_url() in mlflow/utils/validation.py only for the original URL while mlflow/webhooks/delivery.py follows redirects and re-resolves the hostname without pinning the validated address, allowing attackers to reach internal or cloud metadata services and receive response_status and response_body. This issue is fixed in version 3.15.0.
Source: CVE List V5 (CVE Program), cve_2026-10-28_0000Z, as of . About the data.
Weakness
- CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
CWE and CAPEC are maintained by MITRE; the entries are those named in the CVE record and the KEV entry.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| CVE record published | |
| Added to CISA KEV | |
| CISA due date for the required action | |
| CVE record last updated |