VulnerabilityPublished 13 Mar 2026Updated 16 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-32715: Mintplex-Labs anything-llm · Incorrect Authorization

Affects Mintplex-Labs anything-llmSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.8 Low.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.8Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 10% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 13 Mar 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Mintplex-Labsanything-llm	Affected <=1.11.1	Fixed in–
GitHubmintplex-labs/anything-llm`pkg:github/mintplex-labs/anything-llm`Other threats	Affected <=1.11.1	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-32715, organizations should immediately audit and tighten role-based access controls within anything-llm, ensuring that only admin users can access and modify critical system-preferences endpoints. Restrict or disable access to the two generic system-preferences endpoints for manager roles until a vendor patch is available. Implement monitoring and alerting on any access or modification attempts to sensitive settings, especially from manager accounts. Rotate SQL database credentials and Community Hub API keys if there is suspicion of exposure. Employ network segmentation and least privilege principles to limit the scope of manager accounts. Engage with Mintplex-Labs for updates and apply patches promptly once released. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to block unauthorized API calls targeting these endpoints. Conduct regular security reviews and penetration testing focused on authorization controls. Finally, educate internal teams about the risks of privilege misuse and enforce strong authentication and session management for privileged roles.

Description

AnythingLLM is an application that turns pieces of content into context that any LLM can use as references during chatting. In 1.11.1 and earlier, The two generic system-preferences endpoints allow manager role access, while every other surface that touches the same settings is restricted to admin only. Because of this inconsistency, a manager can call the generic endpoints directly to read plaintext SQL database credentials and overwrite admin-only global settings such as the default system prompt and the Community Hub API key.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-32715 is unauthorized access and modification of sensitive system settings by users with manager-level privileges, which should normally have restricted access. Exposure of plaintext SQL database credentials can lead to further compromise of the backend database, risking data confidentiality and integrity beyond the initial application layer. Overwriting global settings such as the default system prompt and Community Hub API key can disrupt normal application operations, degrade system trustworthiness, and potentially allow attackers to manipulate LLM behavior or external integrations. Although the vulnerability does not allow full admin access directly, it facilitates privilege escalation paths and increases the attack surface. Organizations relying on anything-llm for critical workflows or handling sensitive data may face risks of data leakage, service disruption, and reputational damage if exploited. The low CVSS score reflects the prerequisite of manager privileges, but insider threats or compromised manager accounts could leverage this flaw. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the vulnerability should be treated seriously to prevent future exploitation. Overall, the impact is moderate for organizations with multiple user roles and sensitive configurations managed via anything-llm.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (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 20 Mar 2026, 23:26 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats