Splunk AI Toolkit: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
CVE-2026-76397 is a high-severity authorization bypass through user-controlled key vulnerability in Splunk AI Toolkit from Splunk, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.1 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 6.0.0 as the first without the flaw, so updating Splunk AI Toolkit to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.35% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Splunk AI Toolkit to 6.0.0 or a later version.
- Update Ai Toolkit to 6.0.0 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on advisory.splunk.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Splunk | Splunk AI Toolkit | 5.7 up to, but not including, 6.0.0 | 6.0.0 |
| Splunk | Ai Toolkit | 5.7.0 up to, but not including, 6.0.0 | 6.0.0 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N. Scored by CNA (cisco.com).
Official description
In Splunk AI Toolkit versions below 6.0.0, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could access and delete all relevant data in experiment history, including data associated with other users. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk AI Toolkit does not preserve the trusted experiment scope when it processes caller-controlled query values before accessing restricted history data. For more information see Experiment Assistants (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-cloud-platform/apply-machine-learning/use-ai-toolkit/5.6.4/experiment-assistants) in the Splunk documentation.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
- Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
- Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
More Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerabilities (CWE-639)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other vulnerabilities in Splunk AI Toolkit
- 8.1 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
Recent Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerabilities
- 9.6 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.