CVE-2026-53995

HIGHPre-NVD 8.28.2
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 8.2 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-10-20. The CNA's CVSS baseline 8.2; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory
Elevated

Also known asEUVD-2026-104633 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-wqmh-qccw-pqwf (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

8.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • CISA's Vulnrichment rates exploitation as PoC; EchelonGraph holds no exploit-code reference for it
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.6%CVSS: 8.2Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

MLflow 3.17.1 and earlier contains a path traversal vulnerability in the FileStore tracking backend that allows unauthenticated attackers to control filesystem paths by submitting a crafted trace ID containing traversal sequences to the POST /api/3.0/mlflow/traces endpoint. Attackers can exploit FileStore.start_trace() to write trace_info.yaml, request_metadata, and tag files with attacker-controlled metadata outside the intended experiment trace directory, subject to the server process's filesystem permissions. FileStore is the default tracking backend before MLflow 3.7.0 and opt-in thereafter (the default changed to a SQLite database), so deployments in the earlier part of the affected range are vulnerable without special configuration while later ones are affected only when FileStore is explicitly selected.

CVSS v3
8.2
EG Score
8.2HIGHhigh confidence
EG Risk
68
EG Risk 68/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity82% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.2 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation40% × 40%
EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.6%
EPSS %ILE
48th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (8.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
8.2 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-26). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 19, 2026

Last Modified

October 27, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Oct 19, 2026
🔬 Proof of concept available. Patch available. Sources: github_pr.
Web page

MLflow 3.17.1 Path Traversal via Trace ID API | Advisories | VulnCheck

https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/mlflow-path-traversal-via-trace-id-api
GitHub pull request

Fix FileStore trace path traversal (CVE-2026-53995)

Upstream fix in progress (PR #26842 · mlflow/mlflow, state=open)

https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/pull/26842
Web page🟡 PoC Available

GitHub - SaiTeja-Erukude/CVE-2026-53995-mlflow-path-traversal: MLflow <=3.17.1 path traversal allows trace file writes outside the intended directory. · GitHub

https://github.com/SaiTeja-Erukude/CVE-2026-53995-mlflow-path-traversal

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-53995(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
PyPI(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
mlflow0.0.1 ... 3.9.0rc0 (191 versions)
  • every version up to 3.17.2: fixed in 3.17.2
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 20× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  2. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  3. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  4. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  5. 2026-10-27 10:25 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  7. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  8. 2026-10-25 14:20 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
  10. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
  11. 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
  12. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
  13. 2026-10-20 20:26 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-20 20:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-wqmh-qccw-pqwf · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.2
  15. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
  16. 2026-10-20 11:27 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-20 11:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-wqmh-qccw-pqwf · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.2
  18. 2026-10-19 22:30 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-19 21:24 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.2 HIGH
  20. 2026-10-19 21:22 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same product + same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-53995?
CVE-2026-53995 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 19, 2026. MLflow 3.17.1 and earlier contains a path traversal vulnerability in the FileStore tracking backend that allows unauthenticated attackers to control filesystem paths by submitting a crafted trace ID containing traversal sequences to the POST /api/3.0/mlflow/traces endpoint. Attackers can exploit…
When was CVE-2026-53995 made public?
CVE-2026-53995 was made public on October 17, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, VulnCheck, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on October 19, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 27, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-53995 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-53995 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.6% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (48th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-53995?
CVE-2026-53995 has a CVSS base score of 8.2 (the CNA's own assessment, by vulncheck; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-53995?
A fix for CVE-2026-53995 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-53995 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-53995

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-53995?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs