VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 31 Oct 2026

CVE-2024-22421: JupyterLab vulnerable to potential authentication and CSRF tokens leak

Affects jupyterlabSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High : upgrade to 4.0.11 soon.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 16:51 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.6High

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

Patch: Available – fixed in 4.0.11

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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: 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 13 Aug 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 jupyterlab to 4.0.11.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewjupyterlab`pkg:brew/jupyterlab`Other threats	Affected >=1.2.0 <4.0.11	Fixed in 4.0.11

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

Description

### Impact Users of JupyterLab who click on a malicious link may get their `Authorization` and `XSRFToken` tokens exposed to a third party when running an older `jupyter-server` version. ### Patches JupyterLab 4.1.0b2, 4.0.11, and 3.6.7 were patched. ### Workarounds No workaround has been identified, however users should ensure to upgrade `jupyter-server` to version 2.7.2 or newer which includes a redirect vulnerability fix. ### References Vulnerability reported by user @davwwwx via the [bug bounty program](https://app.intigriti.com/programs/jupyter/jupyter/detail) [sponsored by the European Commission](https://commission.europa.eu/news/european-commissions-open-source-programme-office-starts-bug-bounties-2022-01-19_en) and hosted on the [Intigriti platform](https://www.intigriti.com/).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…