Missing Authentication for Critical Function in the Patroni REST API in Splunk Enterprise
Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it. Our CRS test: not blocked.
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.3 and 10.2.7, an unauthenticated user with network access to the Patroni Representational State Transfer (REST) Application Programming Interface (API) on a search head cluster member could execute… More
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.3 and 10.2.7, an unauthenticated user with network access to the Patroni Representational State Transfer (REST) Application Programming Interface (API) on a search head cluster member could execute attacker-controlled operating-system commands. The vulnerability is possible because this interface does not require authentication for critical configuration operations. For more information see Sidecar configuration settings (https://help.splunk.com/en/data-management/splunk-enterprise-admin-manual/10.2/splunk-sidecars/sidecar-configuration-settings) in the Splunk documentation. Splunk Enterprise versions 10.0.x and 9.4.x are not affected.
Edge coverage
Claimed by vendorsAsk Vigil
AI · answers from this pageWorkers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.
Severity, decoded
CVSS 3.1Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability.
How the score is built
- Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.Network
- Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.Low
- Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.None
- User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.None
- ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.Unchanged
- Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.High
- Integrity impactAn attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.High
- Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCISA has seen no public exploit and no attacks.
Attackers can script the attack end to end and hit many targets at once.
A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.
Public exploits
1 found- NucleiCVE-2026-76268.yamldetection template, replayed in our lab
Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.
Timeline
- 2026-10-07CVE publishedCVE List
- 2026-10-21F5 ships a ruleSplunk Enterprise Remote Code Execution (2)
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it throughparanoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it throughparanoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each row gives the rule ID and its default action. The feed starts in January 2025, so older rules are missing.
AWSAWS WAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.
Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.
Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.
FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patches
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The feed holds only the latest 25 changes, so history builds up from the day we started reading it.
F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)
First rule 2026-10-21, 14 days after the CVE was published.
Added: signature 200013236 "Splunk Enterprise Remote Code Execution (2)" (Authentication/Authorization Attacks, risk High), systems: Other Web Server. References: CVE-2026-76268.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)
This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.
OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.
Social
No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.