Vulnerability-Lookup

CVE-2026-32694 (GCVE-0-2026-32694)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-18 12:55 – Updated: 2026-03-18 13:40

Title

Insecure Direct Object Reference attack via predictable secret ID in Juju

Summary

In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, when a secret owner grants permissions to a secret to a grantee, the secret owner relies exclusively on a predictable XID of the secret to verify ownership. This allows a malicious grantee which can request secrets to predict past secrets granted by the same secret owner to different grantees, allowing them to use the resources granted by those past secrets. Successful exploitation relies on a very specific configuration, specific data semantic, and the administrator having the need to deploy at least two different applications, one of them controlled by the attacker.

Severity ?

6.6 (Medium)


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

CWE

CWE-343 - Predictable value range from previous values
CWE-639 - Authorization bypass through User-Controlled key

Assigner

canonical

References

URL

Tags

https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/…

vendor-advisoryvdb-entry

Impacted products

	Vendor	Product	Version
	Canonical	Juju	Affected: 3.0.0 , < 3.6.19 (semver)

Credits

Dima Tisnek

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-32694",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "poc"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-03-18T13:39:10.787656Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-03-18T13:40:33.981Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://github.com/juju/",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "juju",
          "platforms": [
            "Linux"
          ],
          "product": "Juju",
          "repo": "https://github.com/juju/juju",
          "vendor": "Canonical",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.6.19",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Dima Tisnek"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, when a secret owner grants permissions to a secret to a grantee, the secret owner relies exclusively on a predictable XID of the secret to verify ownership. This allows a malicious grantee which can request secrets to predict past secrets granted by the same secret owner to different grantees, allowing them to use the resources granted by those past secrets. Successful exploitation relies on a very specific configuration, specific data semantic, and the administrator having the need to deploy at least two different applications, one of them controlled by the attacker."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-59",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 6.6,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-343",
              "description": "CWE-343 Predictable value range from previous values",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-639",
              "description": "CWE-639 Authorization bypass through User-Controlled key",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-03-18T12:55:42.948Z",
        "orgId": "cc1ad9ee-3454-478d-9317-d3e869d708bc",
        "shortName": "canonical"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory",
            "vdb-entry"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "INTERNAL"
      },
      "title": "Insecure Direct Object Reference attack via predictable secret ID in Juju"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "cc1ad9ee-3454-478d-9317-d3e869d708bc",
    "assignerShortName": "canonical",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-32694",
    "datePublished": "2026-03-18T12:55:42.948Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-03-13T12:53:34.544Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-03-18T13:40:33.981Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-32694\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security@ubuntu.com\",\"published\":\"2026-03-18T14:16:40.503\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-03-19T15:05:34.183\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, when a secret owner grants permissions to a secret to a grantee, the secret owner relies exclusively on a predictable XID of the secret to verify ownership. This allows a malicious grantee which can request secrets to predict past secrets granted by the same secret owner to different grantees, allowing them to use the resources granted by those past secrets. Successful exploitation relies on a very specific configuration, specific data semantic, and the administrator having the need to deploy at least two different applications, one of them controlled by the attacker.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security@ubuntu.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\",\"baseScore\":6.6,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"HIGH\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":0.7,\"impactScore\":5.9}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security@ubuntu.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-343\"},{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-639\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:canonical:juju:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\",\"versionStartIncluding\":\"3.0.0\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"3.6.19\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"3BAFE599-DF11-429B-9A8C-970BDB3065C8\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p\",\"source\":\"security@ubuntu.com\",\"tags\":[\"Exploit\",\"Vendor Advisory\"]}]}}",
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-32694\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"poc\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"total\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-03-18T13:39:10.787656Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-18T13:40:00.568Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Insecure Direct Object Reference attack via predictable secret ID in Juju\", \"source\": {\"discovery\": \"INTERNAL\"}, \"credits\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"finder\", \"value\": \"Dima Tisnek\"}], \"impacts\": [{\"capecId\": \"CAPEC-59\", \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction\"}]}], \"metrics\": [{\"format\": \"CVSS\", \"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 6.6, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"MEDIUM\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\", \"integrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"HIGH\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}, \"scenarios\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"GENERAL\"}]}], \"affected\": [{\"repo\": \"https://github.com/juju/juju\", \"vendor\": \"Canonical\", \"product\": \"Juju\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.0.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.6.19\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}], \"platforms\": [\"Linux\"], \"packageName\": \"juju\", \"collectionURL\": \"https://github.com/juju/\", \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\"}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p\", \"tags\": [\"vendor-advisory\", \"vdb-entry\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, when a secret owner grants permissions to a secret to a grantee, the secret owner relies exclusively on a predictable XID of the secret to verify ownership. This allows a malicious grantee which can request secrets to predict past secrets granted by the same secret owner to different grantees, allowing them to use the resources granted by those past secrets. Successful exploitation relies on a very specific configuration, specific data semantic, and the administrator having the need to deploy at least two different applications, one of them controlled by the attacker.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-343\", \"description\": \"CWE-343 Predictable value range from previous values\"}]}, {\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-639\", \"description\": \"CWE-639 Authorization bypass through User-Controlled key\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"cc1ad9ee-3454-478d-9317-d3e869d708bc\", \"shortName\": \"canonical\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-18T12:55:42.948Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-32694\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-18T13:40:33.981Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-03-13T12:53:34.544Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"cc1ad9ee-3454-478d-9317-d3e869d708bc\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-03-18T12:55:42.948Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"canonical\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.2"
    }
  }
}

GHSA-5CJ2-RQQF-HX9P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-19 17:43 – Updated: 2026-03-19 17:43

Summary

Juju affected by Confused Deputy IDOR attack via Predictable user specified ID in Juju Secrets

Details

Summary

Predictable secret ID and lack of secret origin API enable confused deputy attacks on Juju workloads.

Details

A Juju application can create a secret and grant it to another integrated application (grantee).

When they do so, the secret owner has to communicate the secret id to the grantee.

The grantee, having received the secret id can load the secret content and perform operations on behalf of the secret owner.

However, today the grantee has no way to determine which granted secret belongs to which owner.

Instead the grantee relies on: - being able to read the secret by id (secret was in fact granted, by some entity) - secret id was received over a relation (the remote end of the relation is presumed to be secret owner)

Additionally, secret IDs are XID, which are predictable, here two secrets created by two distinct apps in the same K8s model close in time:

d34vsl7mp25c76301hs0
time (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:28 (Unix 1758068308)
machine: f6c88a
pid: 50072
counter: 6294648

d34vslfmp25c76301hsg
time (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:29 (Unix 1758068309)
machine: f6c88a
pid: 50072
counter: 6294649

PoC

This allows for an IDOR attack where: - actors: - a Good application (the owner of the Victim), - an Evil application, and - a Provider application (the Confused Deputy) - relations: Good --- Provider, Evil --- Provider - secrets: Good and Evil create Secrets, granting them to the Provider and communicate Secret IDs with the Provider. - semantics: the Provider performs some operation on behalf of the Good/Evil using the Secret. - weakness 1: Evil can guess the Secret ID that Good granted and communicated to Provider. - weakness 2: Juju doesn't provide the Provider application the facility to verify the provenance of the Secret IDs. - exploit: Evil passes Good's secret id to Provider. - bypass: Provider performs evil operation with Good's Secret ID on behalf of Evil.

Evil could benefit by: - exfiltrating Good's Secret via reflection. - reading or mutating Good's resources accessible via *Good's Secret.

Impact

This requires a complex setup.

Not all shared secrets are used like above, so an actual exploit requires a very specific relation interface, specific semantics of the data in the databag, and an administrator having a reasonable need to deploy two apps (one evil, one good) related to the same (third) provider app.

If exploited, it can be very hard to determine what went wrong after the fact.

Suggested remediation

1. Longer, random secret IDs

For example, if the secret id was extended with a 128-bit nonce, guessing a sibling secret ID would be infeasible, and an attack of this style would require another weakness (e.g. secret IDs exposed in logs)

2. Grantee secret API

Today, an app is not allowed to call secret-info-get on the granted secret. Additionally, granted secrets are not included in the secret-ids output.

Suppose that the Provider could run these hook tools:

(provider/0)> secret-ids
my-own-secret-123

(provider/0)> secret-ids --grants
good-secret-id-42
evil-secret-id-43

(provider/0)> secret-info-get good-secret-id-42
good-secret-id-42:
  revision: 1
  label: ""
  owner: good
  grant-relation-id: 12
  rotation: never

The Provider would then able to validate the secret ID it's about to use against: - the relation in which the secret ID has been passed (good relation 12 or evil relation 14) - the application or unit name of the secret owner (good or evil)

Severity ?

6.6 (Medium)


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

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/juju/juju"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.0.0-20221021155847-35c560704ee2"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-32694"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-343"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T14:16:40Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nPredictable secret ID and lack of secret origin API enable confused deputy attacks on Juju workloads.\n\n### Details\n\nA Juju application can create a secret and grant it to another integrated application (grantee).\n\nWhen they do so, the secret owner has to communicate the secret id to the grantee.\n\nThe grantee, having received the secret id can load the secret content and perform operations on behalf of the secret owner.\n\nHowever, today the grantee has no way to determine which granted secret belongs to which owner.\n\nInstead the grantee relies on:\n- being able to read the secret by id (secret was in fact granted, by some entity)\n- secret id was received over a relation (the remote end of the relation is presumed to be secret owner)\n\nAdditionally, secret IDs are XID, which are predictable, here two secrets created by two distinct apps in the same K8s model close in time:\n```\nd34vsl7mp25c76301hs0\ntime (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:28 (Unix 1758068308)\nmachine: f6c88a\npid: 50072\ncounter: 6294648\n\nd34vslfmp25c76301hsg\ntime (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:29 (Unix 1758068309)\nmachine: f6c88a\npid: 50072\ncounter: 6294649\n```\n\n### PoC\n\nThis allows for an IDOR attack where:\n- actors:\n  - a **Good** application (the owner of the _Victim_),\n  - an **Evil** application, and\n  - a **Provider** application (the _Confused Deputy_)\n- relations: **Good** --- **Provider**, **Evil** --- **Provider**\n- secrets: **Good** and **Evil** create _Secrets_, granting them to the **Provider** and communicate _Secret IDs_ with the **Provider**.\n- semantics: the **Provider** performs some operation on behalf of the **Good**/**Evil** using the _Secret_.\n- weakness 1: **Evil** can guess the _Secret ID_ that **Good** granted and communicated to **Provider**.\n- weakness 2: _Juju_ doesn\u0027t provide the **Provider** application the facility to verify the provenance of the _Secret IDs_.\n- exploit: **Evil** passes **Good**\u0027s secret id to **Provider**.\n- bypass: **Provider** performs _evil_ operation with **Good**\u0027s _Secret ID_ on behalf of **Evil**.\n\n**Evil** could benefit by:\n- exfiltrating **Good**\u0027s _Secret_ via reflection.\n- reading or mutating **Good**\u0027s resources accessible via **Good*\u0027s _Secret_.\n\n### Impact\n\nThis requires a complex setup.\n\nNot all shared secrets are used like above, so an actual exploit requires a very specific relation interface, specific semantics of the data in the databag, and an administrator having a reasonable need to deploy two apps (one evil, one good) related to the same (third) provider app.\n\nIf exploited, it can be very hard to determine what went wrong after the fact.\n\n### Suggested remediation\n\n#### 1. Longer, random secret IDs\n\nFor example, if the secret id was extended with a 128-bit nonce, guessing a sibling secret ID would be infeasible, and an attack of this style would require another weakness (e.g. secret IDs exposed in logs)\n\n#### 2. Grantee secret API\n\nToday, an app is not allowed to call `secret-info-get` on the granted secret.\nAdditionally, granted secrets are not included in the `secret-ids` output.\n\nSuppose that the Provider could run these hook tools:\n```command\n(provider/0)\u003e secret-ids\nmy-own-secret-123\n\n(provider/0)\u003e secret-ids --grants\ngood-secret-id-42\nevil-secret-id-43\n\n(provider/0)\u003e secret-info-get good-secret-id-42\ngood-secret-id-42:\n  revision: 1\n  label: \"\"\n  owner: good\n  grant-relation-id: 12\n  rotation: never\n```\n\nThe Provider would then able to validate the secret ID it\u0027s about to use against:\n- the relation in which the secret ID has been passed (good relation 12 or evil relation 14)\n- the application or unit name of the secret owner (good or evil)",
  "id": "GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p",
  "modified": "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
  "published": "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32694"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/d06919eb03ec68156818bcc304b5fe1c39a8f9e9"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Juju affected by Confused Deputy IDOR attack via Predictable user specified ID in Juju Secrets"
}

FKIE_CVE-2026-32694

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-03-18 14:16 - Updated: 2026-03-19 15:05

Severity ?

6.6 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Summary

References

	URL	Tags
	security@ubuntu.com	https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p	Exploit, Vendor Advisory

Impacted products

	Vendor	Product	Version
	canonical	juju	*

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:canonical:juju:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "3BAFE599-DF11-429B-9A8C-970BDB3065C8",
              "versionEndExcluding": "3.6.19",
              "versionStartIncluding": "3.0.0",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, when a secret owner grants permissions to a secret to a grantee, the secret owner relies exclusively on a predictable XID of the secret to verify ownership. This allows a malicious grantee which can request secrets to predict past secrets granted by the same secret owner to different grantees, allowing them to use the resources granted by those past secrets. Successful exploitation relies on a very specific configuration, specific data semantic, and the administrator having the need to deploy at least two different applications, one of them controlled by the attacker."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "En Juju desde la versi\u00f3n 3.0.0 hasta la 3.6.18, cuando un propietario de secreto otorga permisos a un secreto a un beneficiario, el propietario del secreto se basa exclusivamente en un XID predecible del secreto para verificar la propiedad. Esto permite a un beneficiario malicioso que puede solicitar secretos predecir secretos pasados otorgados por el mismo propietario de secreto a diferentes beneficiarios, permiti\u00e9ndoles usar los recursos otorgados por esos secretos pasados. La explotaci\u00f3n exitosa se basa en una configuraci\u00f3n muy espec\u00edfica, una sem\u00e1ntica de datos espec\u00edfica y en que el administrador tenga la necesidad de desplegar al menos dos aplicaciones diferentes, una de ellas controlada por el atacante."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-32694",
  "lastModified": "2026-03-19T15:05:34.183",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 6.6,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 0.7,
        "impactScore": 5.9,
        "source": "security@ubuntu.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-03-18T14:16:40.503",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@ubuntu.com",
      "tags": [
        "Exploit",
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@ubuntu.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-343"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-639"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@ubuntu.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}

Sightings

Author	Source	Type	Date

Nomenclature

Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Action not permitted

CVE-2026-32694 (GCVE-0-2026-32694)

GHSA-5CJ2-RQQF-HX9P

Summary

Details

PoC

Impact

Suggested remediation

1. Longer, random secret IDs

2. Grantee secret API

FKIE_CVE-2026-32694

Tags

Sightings

Nomenclature