Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Evidence used
No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
EPSS is 2.36% for the current model date.
Compensating controls
Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
Confirm that the asset runs mlflow mlflow/mlflow and falls inside the recorded affected range.
Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Cross-source reconciliation
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Red Hat Product Security: 1 affected or under-investigation product state without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
1 current
CVE-2025-15379 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitymlflow: MLflow: Arbitrary command execution via command injection in model serving container initialization.
1 known affected
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
rhoai/odh-training-cuda128-torch29-py312-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat OpenShift AI (RHOAI)
Summary
A flaw was found in MLflow. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function, reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file. An attacker can supply a malicious model artifact, leading to command injection as these specifications are directly interpolated into a shell command without proper sanitization. This allows for arbitrary command execution on systems deploying the malicious model.
Remediation
To mitigate this issue, avoid deploying MLflow models with `env_manager=LOCAL`. If using `env_manager=LOCAL` is unavoidable, ensure that all model artifacts, particularly their `python_env.yaml` files, originate from trusted sources and are thoroughly vetted for malicious content. This operational control helps prevent the injection of arbitrary commands during model serving container initialization.
Optional official sources
National CERT insights ?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.
Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.
Official European source
ENISA European Vulnerability Database
Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.
1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier
EUVD-2025-209121
No EUVD known-exploited evidence
A command injection vulnerability exists in MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically in the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file and directly interpolates them into a shell command without sanitization. This allows an attacker to supply a malicious model artifact and achieve arbitrary command execution on systems that deploy the model. The vulnerability affects versions 3.8.0 and is fixed in version 3.8.2.
EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
9.0 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix
Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product
01
What, why and how
A command injection vulnerability exists in MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically in the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file and directly interpolates them into a shell command without sanitization. This allows an attacker to supply a malicious model artifact and achieve arbitrary command execution on systems that deploy the model. The vulnerability affects versions 3.8.0 and is fixed in version 3.8.2.
What
A command injection vulnerability exists in MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically in the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file and directly interpolates them into a shell command without sanitization. This allows an attacker to supply a malicious model artifact and achieve arbitrary command execution on systems that deploy the model. The vulnerability affects versions 3.8.0 and is fixed in version 3.8.2.
Why
Untrusted input reaches a command interpreter without sufficient validation or separation from command syntax.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
A command injection vulnerability exists in MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically in the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file and directly interpolates them into a shell command without sanitization. This allows an attacker to supply a malicious model artifact and achieve arbitrary command execution on systems that deploy the model. The vulnerability affects versions 3.8.0 and is fixed in version 3.8.2.
Why
Untrusted input reaches a command interpreter without sufficient validation or separation from command syntax.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation ?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No confirmed evidence
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material ?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.Reference recorded
A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Changed: exploitation can affect a different security authority
Weakness ?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-77: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
CVSS vector ?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SChangedScope: The attack can affect a component governed by a different security authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
A command injection vulnerability exists in MLflow's model serving container initialization code, specifically in the `_install_model_dependencies_to_env()` function. When deploying a model with `env_manager=LOCAL`, MLflow reads dependency specifications from the model artifact's `python_env.yaml` file and directly interpolates them into a shell command without sanitization. This allows an attacker to supply a malicious model artifact and achieve arbitrary command execution on systems that deploy the model. The vulnerability affects versions 3.8.0 and is fixed in version 3.8.2.
Official EUVD record ↗Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260401Security Bulletin 01 Apr 2026
The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 01 Apr 2026, published on 1 April 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.
Official advisory ↗JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-013457lfprojectsのmlflowにおけるコマンドインジェクションの脆弱性
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Status ?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
To mitigate this issue, avoid deploying MLflow models with `env_manager=LOCAL`. If using `env_manager=LOCAL` is unavoidable, ensure that all model artifacts, particularly their `python_env.yaml` files, originate from trusted sources and are thoroughly vetted for malicious content. This operational control helps prevent the injection of arbitrary commands during model serving container initialization.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 30 Mar 2026 · Last source change 7 Sept 2026, 12:05 UTC · CWE-77 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source ?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-209121
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.