CVE-2026-26010VulnerabilityPublished 11 Feb 2026Updated 12 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-26010: open-metadata OpenMetadata · Improper Privilege Management

Affects open-metadata OpenMetadataSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High : upgrade to 1.11.8 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.6High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.11.8

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade open-metadata OpenMetadata to 1.11.8.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
open-metadataOpenMetadata	Affected <1.11.8	Fixed in 1.11.8

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-26010, organizations should immediately upgrade OpenMetadata to version 1.11.8 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. Until the upgrade is applied, restrict read-only user access to the OpenMetadata UI and API endpoints, especially /api/v1/ingestionPipelines, to trusted personnel only. Implement strict network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of the metadata platform to untrusted networks. Monitor logs for unusual access patterns or attempts to retrieve ingestion-bot JWT tokens. Employ multi-factor authentication and strong identity management to reduce the risk of unauthorized read-only access. Review and audit role assignments and permissions regularly to ensure least privilege principles are enforced. Additionally, consider rotating credentials and tokens associated with ingestion-bot roles to invalidate any potentially leaked tokens. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any detected exploitation attempts.

Description

OpenMetadata is a unified metadata platform. Prior to 1.11.8, calls issued by the UI against /api/v1/ingestionPipelines leak JWTs used by ingestion-bot for certain services (Glue / Redshift / Postgres). Any read-only user can gain access to a highly privileged account, typically which has the Ingestion Bot Role. This enables destructive changes in OpenMetadata instances, and potential data leakage (e.g.sample data, or service metadata which would be unavailable per roles/policies). This vulnerability is fixed in 1.11.8.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2026-26010 is significant for organizations using OpenMetadata versions prior to 1.11.8. Attackers with only read-only access can escalate privileges to a highly privileged ingestion-bot role, enabling unauthorized destructive changes to metadata configurations and ingestion pipelines. This can disrupt data governance, data lineage tracking, and metadata integrity, potentially causing operational downtime or data inconsistencies. Moreover, the exposure of JWT tokens can lead to data leakage, revealing sensitive sample data and service metadata that should be protected by role-based policies. Such data exposure can violate compliance requirements and lead to reputational damage. The vulnerability affects the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the metadata platform and associated data services. Since OpenMetadata is often deployed in data-centric organizations, including enterprises relying on cloud data warehouses and data lakes, the risk extends to critical business intelligence and analytics workflows. Although no known exploits are reported in the wild yet, the ease of exploitation and the high privileges gained make this a critical risk that could be targeted by malicious insiders or external attackers who have gained read-only access.

CWE-269Improper Privilege Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Restful Privilege Elevation (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Abuse (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Escalation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Feb 2026, 13:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-269

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats