CVE-2026-76347 (GCVE-0-2026-76347)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-08-19 21:34 – Updated: 2026-08-19 21:34
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) through the Report Notifications REST API in Splunk Secure Gateway
Summary
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, and Splunk Secure Gateway versions below 3.10.9, 3.9.23, and 3.8.70, a user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles could use Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in report notifications to send system-authenticated requests to internal Splunk services, which could allow for changes to Search Head Cluster state and a denial of service. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Secure Gateway does not validate report notification path values before it sends internal requests.
Severity
5.4 (Medium)
CWE
- CWE-918 - The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
Assigner
References
1 reference
Impacted products
2 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | CPE status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Splunk | Splunk Enterprise |
Affected:
10.4 , < 10.4.2
(custom)
Affected: 10.2 , < 10.2.6 (custom) Affected: 10.0 , < 10.0.9 (custom) Affected: 9.4 , < 9.4.14 (custom) |
guessed | |
| Splunk | Splunk Secure Gateway |
Affected:
3.10 , < 3.10.9
(custom)
Affected: 3.9 , < 3.9.23 (custom) Affected: 3.8 , < 3.8.70 (custom) |
guessed |
Date Public
2026-08-19 00:00
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"modules": [
"Splunk Secure Gateway"
],
"product": "Splunk Enterprise",
"vendor": "Splunk",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.4.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.4",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "10.2.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.2",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "10.0.9",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "9.4.14",
"status": "affected",
"version": "9.4",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Splunk Secure Gateway",
"vendor": "Splunk",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "3.10.9",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.10",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.9.23",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.9",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.8.70",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.8",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-08-19T00:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/markdown",
"value": "In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, and Splunk Secure Gateway versions below 3.10.9, 3.9.23, and 3.8.70, a user who does not hold the \"admin\" or \"power\" Splunk roles could use Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in report notifications to send system-authenticated requests to internal Splunk services, which could allow for changes to Search Head Cluster state and a denial of service. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Secure Gateway does not validate report notification path values before it sends internal requests."
}
],
"value": "In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, and Splunk Secure Gateway versions below 3.10.9, 3.9.23, and 3.8.70, a user who does not hold the \"admin\" or \"power\" Splunk roles could use Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in report notifications to send system-authenticated requests to internal Splunk services, which could allow for changes to Search Head Cluster state and a denial of service. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Secure Gateway does not validate report notification path values before it sends internal requests."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 5.4,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-918",
"description": "The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.",
"lang": "en",
"type": "cwe"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-19T21:34:43.078Z",
"orgId": "d1c1063e-7a18-46af-9102-31f8928bc633",
"shortName": "cisco"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://advisory.splunk.com/advisories/SVD-2026-0801"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Upgrade Splunk Enterprise to versions 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, or higher."
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "SVD-2026-0801"
},
"title": "Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) through the Report Notifications REST API in Splunk Secure Gateway",
"workarounds": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Upgrade Splunk Secure Gateway to versions 3.10.9, 3.9.23, and 3.8.70, or higher. If you cannot upgrade Splunk Enterprise or Splunk Secure Gateway, turn off or remove the Splunk Secure Gateway app. See [Manage app and add-on objects](https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/admin-manual/10.2/meet-splunk-apps/manage-app-and-add-on-objects) in the Splunk documentation. Note: Splunk Mobile, Spacebridge, and Mission Control rely on functionality in the Splunk Secure Gateway app. If you do not use any of these apps, features, or functionality, as a potential mitigation, you may turn off or remove the app."
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "d1c1063e-7a18-46af-9102-31f8928bc633",
"assignerShortName": "cisco",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-76347",
"datePublished": "2026-08-19T21:34:43.078Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-08-19T12:02:03.628Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-19T21:34:43.078Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
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.
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Loading…
Loading…