CVE-2026-117574: Ai-gateway-payload-processing: ai-gateway-payload-processing: tenant/credential selection from client-controlled url path with no in-process authorization
A flaw was found in ai-gateway-payload-processing. An authenticated remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability by submitting a request specifying another tenant's model identifier in the request body or header. Because the service does not verify authorization before retrieving credentials from the shared store, it injects the target tenant's application programming interface (API) keys into the request. This flaw allows an attacker to perform unauthorized requests and consume another tenant's large language model (LLM) resources and quotas.
Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
An authenticated user could make the AI gateway use another tenant’s API credentials for model requests. This could consume that tenant’s paid AI resources and quotas, weakening separation between customers or business units. The supplied record rates the flaw critical, but does not identify affected versions, a fix, or confirmed exploitation.
Executive priority
Promptly assign an owner to assess affected gateway deployments, especially shared tenant environments. Unauthorized AI usage could create unexpected charges and exhaust quotas. Treat confirmed exposure as urgent, while distinguishing the critical technical rating from evidence of an actual incident. Remediation timing depends on vendor guidance absent from this bundle.
Technical view
CVE-2026-117574 describes missing tenant authorization before ai-gateway-payload-processing retrieves credentials from a shared store. A client-controlled tenant or model selection can cause another tenant’s API keys to be injected into an outbound request. The record assigns CWE-639 and CVSS 3.1 9.1, with network access, low privileges, no user interaction, and changed scope.
Likely exposure
The bundle marks Red Hat OpenShift AI package rhoai/odh-ai-gateway-payload-processing-rhel9 affected by default, while rhoai/odh-ai-gateway-payload-processing-e2e-rhel9 is marked unaffected. No version ranges are supplied. Prioritize deployments where authenticated users access a gateway serving multiple tenants through a shared credential store; installation alone does not establish a reachable vulnerable configuration.
Exploitation context
Exploitation requires an authenticated remote attacker according to the description and CVSS vector. The bundle records KEV as false and provides no evidence of active exploitation or a public exploit. Credential injection enables unauthorized use; the supplied description does not establish that raw API keys are returned to the attacker.
Researcher notes
The title identifies a client-controlled URL path, while the description identifies a model identifier in the body or header. The precise input location remains unresolved. CVSS indicates high confidentiality impact, but the description specifically establishes unauthorized credential use, not direct key disclosure. Version boundaries, patches, and compensating-control effectiveness are not supplied.
Mitigation direction
Check Red Hat’s advisory and linked issue for affected versions, fixed builds, and supported mitigations.
Apply vendor-recommended remediation once confirmed for the deployed package and version.
Review tenant authorization and shared credential access controls to identify exposure while awaiting vendor-specific guidance.
Validation and detection
Inventory deployed gateway package names and versions, distinguishing the affected runtime package from the unaffected e2e package.
Confirm whether authenticated clients can select models backed by other tenants’ credentials and whether authorization precedes credential retrieval.
Review gateway and provider usage records for mismatches between requesting tenant, selected model, credential owner, and quota charges.
Validate any remediation in an authorized test environment using synthetic tenants and credentials.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Potential ATT&CK relevance
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 · low confidence lookup
CWE-639: 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.
The CVE wording references authentication or credential exposure, so valid-account and credential-access review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
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.
We 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.