Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
A logged-in ArcadeDB reader can cross a major trust boundary and gain server-wide administrator control. The flaw affects versions before 26.8.1 and can compromise database confidentiality, integrity, and availability without user interaction.
Executive priority
Treat this as an urgent remediation item for affected systems. Prioritize externally reachable or broadly accessible gRPC deployments and environments holding sensitive data. Because authenticated reader access can become server-wide administration, credential compromise or misuse could lead to full database takeover.
Technical view
ArcadeDB fails to bind the authenticated principal to the gRPC transaction executor thread during beginTransaction. Consequently, an authenticated reader can invoke executeCommand with a transaction identifier and bypass scripting authorization, enabling unrestricted JavaScript execution and creation of server-wide administrator accounts.
Likely exposure
Deployments running ArcadeDB earlier than 26.8.1 are potentially exposed, especially where gRPC is reachable and reader credentials exist. Internet or broadly network-accessible gRPC services increase risk, but the source bundle does not establish how commonly gRPC is exposed by default.
Exploitation context
The attack requires authenticated low-privilege access but has low complexity, needs no user interaction, and can produce server-wide administrative control. The source bundle does not identify CISA KEV listing or evidence of active exploitation. Real-world exploitation status therefore remains unconfirmed.
Researcher notes
This is a CWE-269 authorization-context failure across executor threads, not merely an excessive database grant. The scope-changing CVSS 3.1 score is 9.9. Evidence supports the affected boundary and privilege impact, but the supplied version array is ambiguous; the title and description consistently define affected releases as versions before 26.8.1.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade ArcadeDB to version 26.8.1 or later after appropriate compatibility testing.
- Until upgraded, restrict gRPC access to trusted networks and tightly control authenticated reader accounts.
- Review vendor guidance for additional hardening, detection, and release-specific instructions.
- Investigate and disable unexpected administrator accounts using established incident-response procedures.
Validation and detection
- Inventory ArcadeDB deployments and identify every instance running a version earlier than 26.8.1.
- Determine whether gRPC is reachable from untrusted networks or accessible to low-privilege users.
- Review account creation and privilege-change records for unexpected server-wide administrators.
- After upgrading, verify the deployed version and confirm normal authorization boundaries in an isolated environment.
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-269: Authorization and privilege behavior lookup
Authorization weaknesses can support privilege escalation and valid-account review, depending on exploit path. 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 lookupPrivilege behavior lookup
The CVE wording references privilege impact, so privilege escalation and authorization behavior review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2026-75843 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
- Critical
- CVSS
- 9.9 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H3.16VulnCheckCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H——VulnCheckVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 4.0 score
9.4CriticalVector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H
Base CVSS 3.1 score
9.9CriticalVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-p29f-345w-4qwf)CVE reference, VulnCheck · vendor-advisory
- VulnCheck Advisory: ArcadeDB before 26.8.1 Privilege Escalation via gRPC TransactionCVE reference, VulnCheck · third-party-advisory
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.
Improper Privilege Management
Improper Privilege Management represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.