VulnerabilityPublished 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-27900: terraform-provider-linode · Sensitive Data in Logs

Affects terraform-provider-linodeSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.0 Medium : upgrade to 3.9.0 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.9.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N

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

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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 Oct 2026.

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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 terraform-provider-linode and linode/terraform-provider-linode to 3.9.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
linodeterraform-provider-linode	Affected <3.9.0	Fixed in 3.9.0
GitHublinode/terraform-provider-linode`pkg:github/linode/terraform-provider-linode`Other threats	Affected <3.9.0	Fixed in 3.9.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should first upgrade the Terraform Provider for Linode to version 3.9.0 or later, where debug logs are sanitized to redact sensitive information. If upgrading immediately is not feasible, disable debug logging or set the logging level to WARN or higher to prevent sensitive data from being logged. Restrict access to existing and historical debug logs by enforcing strict access controls and auditing log access. Purge or trim retention of logs that may contain sensitive information to minimize exposure. Rotate any credentials, passwords, tokens, or keys that may have been exposed through debug logs to invalidate compromised secrets. Additionally, review CI/CD pipelines and centralized logging configurations to ensure debug logs are not inadvertently exposed or retained longer than necessary. Implement monitoring and alerting for unusual access to logs or credential usage to detect potential exploitation attempts. Finally, educate development and operations teams about the risks of enabling debug logging in production or shared environments.

Description

The Terraform Provider for Linode versions prior to v3.9.0 logged sensitive information including some passwords, StackScript content, and object storage data in debug logs without redaction. Provider debug logging is not enabled by default. This issue is exposed when debug/provider logs are explicitly enabled (for example in local troubleshooting, CI/CD jobs, or centralized log collection). If enabled, sensitive values may be written to logs and then retained, shared, or exported beyond the original execution environment. An authenticated user with access to provider debug logs (through log aggregation systems, CI/CD pipelines, or debug output) would thus be able to extract these sensitive credentials. Versions 3.9.0 and later sanitize debug logs by logging only non-sensitive metadata such as labels, regions, and resource IDs while redacting credentials, tokens, keys, scripts, and other sensitive content. Some other mitigations and workarounds are available. Disable Terraform/provider debug logging or set it to `WARN` level or above, restrict access to existing and historical logs, purge/retention-trim logs that may contain sensitive values, and/or rotate potentially exposed secrets/credentials.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is the potential exposure of sensitive credentials and secrets through debug logs. If an attacker or unauthorized user gains access to these logs, they could extract passwords, API tokens, StackScript content, and object storage data, which could lead to unauthorized access to cloud resources, data exfiltration, or further compromise of infrastructure. Organizations using affected versions of the Terraform Provider for Linode in environments where debug logging is enabled and logs are aggregated or retained without strict access controls are at risk. This exposure could undermine the confidentiality of sensitive information and potentially lead to privilege escalation or lateral movement within cloud environments. However, since debug logging is not enabled by default and exploitation requires access to logs and some level of authentication, the overall risk is moderated. The vulnerability does not impact integrity or availability directly. The scope includes any organization using Linode cloud infrastructure managed via Terraform with the vulnerable provider versions and debug logging enabled, especially in automated CI/CD or centralized logging environments.

CWE-532Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A09:2025: Security Logging & Alerting Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product writes sensitive information to a log file.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Consider seriously the sensitivity of the information written into log files. Do not write secrets into the log files.
Distribution
Remove debug log files before deploying the application into production.
Operation
Protect log files against unauthorized read/write.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Application Logging Vocabulary (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V7.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
V7.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fuzzing for application mapping (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 5 Mar 2026, 11:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-532

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats