CVE-2026-88982VulnerabilityPublished 9 Nov 2026

github.com/kubeflow/pipelines · Kubeflow Pipelines: Cross-tenant execution-cache poisoning / output substitution via a namespace-blind cache key in

Affects github.com/kubeflow/pipelinesSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-88982· Medium 5.4

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium : upgrade to 0.0.0-20260910172610-620d0cc89ae0 when convenient.

Data as of 9 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	5.4

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.0.0-20260910172610-620d0cc89ae0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: 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: 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 5 Nov 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 9 Nov 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 github.com/kubeflow/pipelines to 0.0.0-20260910172610-620d0cc89ae0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Gogithub.com/kubeflow/pipelines	Affected <0.0.0-20260910172610-620d0cc89ae0	Fixed in 0.0.0-20260910172610-620d0cc89ae0

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

AI-suggested

A fix is available and merged in Kubeflow Pipelines version 2.18.0. Deployments should upgrade to version 2.18.0 or later to enforce namespace isolation in the execution cache. The upgrade supports rolling updates without manual pod restarts, but full namespace isolation is enforced only after all old cache-server processes have exited. Until upgraded, tenants should be aware of the risk of cross-tenant cache output leakage and substitution in multi-tenant environments using the legacy cache service. No additional mitigations are specified in the advisory.

Description

Kubeflow Pipelines V1/raw-Argo execution cache does not separate cached results by Kubernetes namespace, allowing tenants sharing the cache service to read or substitute cached outputs across namespaces. This cross-tenant cache key collision impacts confidentiality and integrity of cached step outputs but does not enable arbitrary code execution. The issue affects multi-tenant deployments using the legacy cache service with cache-enabled V1/raw-Argo steps. A fix was merged and released in version 2.18.0.

Impact

An attacker tenant with workload submission privileges in a multi-tenant Kubeflow Pipelines deployment can read cached step outputs produced by other tenants or cause substitution of outputs by poisoning the shared cache. This results in cross-namespace confidentiality and integrity violations of cached execution results. There is no impact on availability or arbitrary code execution. The vulnerability does not elevate security authority between tenants but allows selective disclosure and output substitution within the shared cache service.

Summary

The legacy Kubeflow Pipelines V1/raw-Argo execution cache uses a cache key derived from selected Argo template fields but omits the Kubernetes namespace, causing cache entries to be shared across tenant namespaces. This allows a tenant to read cached outputs from another tenant or to poison the cache by pre-populating outputs that substitute the intended execution results of another tenant's step. The vulnerability arises from missing namespace scoping in cache key computation and storage, and from trusting a mutable pod annotation for cache keys. The fix enforces namespace isolation by including the namespace in cache keys, validating keys against observed namespaces, and scoping cache reads and writes by namespace. The vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2026-88982 with a CVSS 3.1 score of 5.4 (medium severity). The first fixed release is Kubeflow Pipelines version 2.18.0; all prior versions remain affected.

CWE-345Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) (opens in a new tab)
Cache Poisoning (opens in a new tab)
DNS Cache Poisoning (opens in a new tab)
Spoofing of UDDI/ebXML Messages (opens in a new tab)
Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-639Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #24OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Architecture and Design
For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
Architecture and Design
Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V4.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (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 9 Nov 2026, 23:20 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-345, CWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats