BlackTreeIndependent security intelligenceSplunk · Splunk Enterprise
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verifiedIn Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.1, 10.2.5, 10.0.8, and 9.4.13, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 10.5.2605.0, 10.4.2604.7, 10.3.2512.16, 10.2.2510.18, and 10.1.2507.24, an attacker could trick a user that holds a role with the `list_deployment_server` capability into running arbitrary Search Processing Language (SPL) searches on their behalf as `splunk-system-user`, allowing for access to stored credentials and indexed data.<br><br>The vulnerability is possible because Deployment Server endpoints in Splunk Web do not validate Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) tokens on GET requests, and caller-supplied input is not correctly neutralized before it is placed into an SPL search.
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.1, 10.2.5, 10.0.8, and 9.4.13, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 10.5.2605.0, 10.4.2604.7, 10.3.2512.16, 10.2.2510.18, and 10.1.2507.24, an attacker could trick a user that holds a role with the `list_deployment_server` capability into running arbitrary Search Processing Language (SPL) searches on their behalf as `splunk-system-user`, allowing for access to stored credentials and indexed data.<br><br>The vulnerability is possible because Deployment Server endpoints in Splunk Web do not validate Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) tokens on GET requests, and caller-supplied input is not correctly neutralized before it is placed into an SPL search.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.1, 10.2.5, 10.0.8, and 9.4.13, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 10.5.2605.0, 10.4.2604.7, 10.3.2512.16, 10.2.2510.18, and 10.1.2507.24, an attacker could trick a user that holds a role with the `list_deployment_server` capability into running arbitrary Search Processing Language (SPL) searches on their behalf as `splunk-system-user`, allowing for access to stored credentials and indexed data.<br><br>The vulnerability is possible because Deployment Server endpoints in Splunk Web do not validate Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) tokens on GET requests, and caller-supplied input is not correctly neutralized before it is placed into an SPL search.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF). The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:LCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 15 Jul 2026 · Last source change 16 Jul 2026, 03:55 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.