Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
MLflow deployments using the basic-auth app can let any logged-in user see trace data and add trace assessments, even when that user has no permissions on the experiment. This can expose sensitive trace metadata and let unauthorized users alter assessment records.
Executive priority
Treat this as a high-priority access-control issue for MLflow environments, especially where traces contain sensitive data or assessments influence AI governance decisions. Prioritize inventory, access restriction, and vendor patch tracking.
Technical view
CVE-2025-15381 is an authorization bypass in mlflow/mlflow when launched with `mlflow server --app-name=basic-auth`. Tracing and assessment endpoints lack permission validators, allowing low-privileged authenticated users to read trace information and create assessments. The CVSS score is 8.1 high, with confidentiality and integrity impact.
Likely exposure
Exposure is limited to MLflow servers using the `basic-auth` app. Risk is highest where many users can authenticate, experiments contain sensitive traces, or trace assessments affect model evaluation or governance workflows.
Exploitation context
The source bundle does not show CISA KEV listing or active exploitation evidence. The issue is network-reachable, low-complexity, and requires a valid authenticated account, so insider or compromised-account misuse is the main concern.
Researcher notes
The public bundle names the vulnerable mode and impact but does not provide fixed versions, complete affected version ranges, or confirmed exploitation. Avoid assuming broader MLflow exposure outside basic-auth deployments unless vendor sources confirm it.
Mitigation direction
- Identify MLflow servers launched with `--app-name=basic-auth`.
- Check MLflow and vendor advisories for fixed versions or official mitigations.
- Restrict MLflow access to trusted users and networks until remediated.
- Limit trace content that may include sensitive metadata or business data.
- Review low-privilege authenticated accounts for continued need.
Validation and detection
- Inventory MLflow deployments and confirm whether basic-auth mode is enabled.
- Review experiment permissions for users with no or low privileges.
- Inspect logs for trace or assessment access by unexpected authenticated users.
- Confirm whether trace assessments affect downstream evaluation, approval, or reporting.
- Track Red Hat, CVE, and huntr entries for patch status updates.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-200: Information exposure and cloud metadata lookup
Information exposure and SSRF weaknesses can make discovery, cloud metadata, and credential material review relevant. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCWE-425: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2025-15381 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- High
- CVSS
- 8.1 (3.0)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
2 official scoresWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N2.85.2@huntr_aiCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N2.85.2redhat-SADPVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 3.1 score
8.1HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Base CVSS 3.0 score
8.1HighVector: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- ADP timelineredhat-SADP
Made public.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- ADP timelineredhat-SADP
Reported to Red Hat.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
- 2026-03-27T17:01:46.927Z: Reported to Red Hat.
- 2026-03-27T16:17:30.328Z: Made public.
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://huntr.com/bounties/149fb2f9-ef4b-4136-a25c-20563451904cCVE reference, @huntr_ai
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15381CVE reference, redhat-SADP · vdb-entry, x_refsource_REDHAT
- RHBZ#2452341CVE reference, redhat-SADP · issue-tracking, x_refsource_REDHAT
- https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2025/cve-2025-15381.jsonCVE reference, redhat-SADP · x_sadp-csaf-vex
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.
Direct Request ('Forced Browsing')
Direct Request ('Forced Browsing') represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.