In Juju versions prior to 2.9.57 and 3.6.21, an authorization issue exists in the Controller facade. An authenticated user can call the CloudSpec API method to extract the cloud credentials used to bootstrap the controller. This allows a low-privileged user to access sensitive cr...
Vendor
juju vulnerabilities
20 published CVES affecting juju, from public sources (CVE.org, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS, OSV).
- Total
- 20
- Critical
- 2
- High
- 4
- Medium
- 12
- Low
- 2
- Unscored
- 0
- CISA KEV
- 0
Products
Latest juju CVEs
Newest publication first
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.46%
-
MediumCVSS 6.1 EPSS 0.25%
Improper synchronization of the userTokens map in the API server in Canonical Juju 4.0.5, 3.6.20, and 2.9.56 may allow an authenticated user to possibly cause a denial of service on the server or possibly reuse a single-use discharge token.
-
CVE-2025-68153 Juju: Resource poisoning
PublishedHighCVSS 7.1 EPSS 0.24%Juju is an open source application orchestration engine that enables any application operation on any infrastructure at any scale through special operators called ‘charms’. From versions 2.9 to before 2.9.56 and 3.6 to before 3.6.19, any authenticated user, machine or controller...
-
MediumCVSS 6.9 EPSS 0.37%
Juju is an open source application orchestration engine that enables any application operation on any infrastructure at any scale through special operators called ‘charms’. From versions 2.9 to before 2.9.56 and 3.6 to before 3.6.19, it is possible that a compromised workload mac...
-
CriticalCVSS 10.0 EPSS 0.39%
A vulnerability was identified in Juju from version 3.2.0 until 3.6.19 and from version 4.0 until 4.0.4, where the internal Dqlite database cluster fails to perform proper TLS client and server authentication. Specifically, the Juju controller's database endpoint does not validat...
-
MediumCVSS 6.6 EPSS 0.29%
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 secret...
-
HighCVSS 8.8 EPSS 0.32%
In Juju from version 3.0.0 through 3.6.18, the authorization of the "secret-set" tool is not performed correctly, which allows a grantee to update the secret content, and can lead to reading or updating other secrets. When the "secret-set" tool logs an error in an exploitation at...
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.17%
An authorization bypass vulnerability in the Vault secrets back-end implementation of Juju versions 3.1.6 through 3.6.18 allows an authenticated unit agent to perform unauthorized updates to secret revisions. With sufficient information, an attacker can poison any existing secret...
-
MediumCVSS 5.3 EPSS 0.25%
A race condition in the secrets management subsystem of Juju versions 3.0.0 through 3.6.18 allows an authenticated unit agent to claim ownership of a newly initialized secret. Between generating a Juju Secret ID and creating the secret's first revision, an attacker authenticated...
-
LowCVSS 2.1 EPSS 0.14%
Vulnerable cross-model authorization in juju. If a charm's cross-model permissions are revoked or expire, a malicious user who is able to update database records can mint an invalid macaroon that is incorrectly validated by the juju controller, enabling a charm to maintain otherw...
-
HighCVSS 8.8 EPSS 0.70%
In Juju versions prior to 3.6.8 and 2.9.52, any authenticated controller user was allowed to upload arbitrary agent binaries to any model or to the controller itself, without verifying model membership or requiring explicit permissions. This enabled the distribution of poisoned b...
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.80%
The /charms endpoint on a Juju controller lacked sufficient authorization checks, allowing any user with an account on the controller to upload a charm. Uploading a malicious charm that exploits a Zip Slip vulnerability could allow an attacker to gain access to a machine running...
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.38%
The /log endpoint on a Juju controller lacked sufficient authorization checks, allowing unauthorized users to access debug messages that could contain sensitive information.
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.16%
Certificate generation in juju/utils using the cert.NewLeaf function could include private information. If this certificate were then transferred over the network in plaintext, an attacker listening on that network could sniff the certificate and trivially extract the private key...
-
MediumCVSS 4.9 EPSS 0.64%
An authenticated user who has read access to the juju controller model, may construct a remote request to download an arbitrary file from the controller's filesystem.
-
MediumCVSS 5.5 EPSS 0.21%
Vulnerable juju introspection abstract UNIX domain socket. An abstract UNIX domain socket responsible for introspection is available without authentication locally to network namespace users. This enables denial of service attacks.
-
MediumCVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.19%
Vulnerable juju hook tool abstract UNIX domain socket. When combined with an attack of JUJU_CONTEXT_ID, any user on the local system with access to the default network namespace may connect to the @/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-xxxx-yyyy/agent.socket and perform actions that are norm...
-
HighCVSS 8.0 EPSS 0.50%
JUJU_CONTEXT_ID is a predictable authentication secret. On a Juju machine (non-Kubernetes) or Juju charm container (on Kubernetes), an unprivileged user in the same network namespace can connect to an abstract domain socket and guess the JUJU_CONTEXT_ID value. This gives the unpr...
-
LowCVSS 3.8 EPSS 0.38%
An issue was discovered in Juju that resulted in the leak of the sensitive context ID, which allows a local unprivileged attacker to access other sensitive data or relation accessible to the local charm.
-
CriticalCVSS 9.8 EPSS 48.5% Framework module Public exploit
Juju before 1.25.12, 2.0.x before 2.0.4, and 2.1.x before 2.1.3 uses a UNIX domain socket without setting appropriate permissions, allowing privilege escalation by users on the system to root.
Sources: CVE.org, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS, OSV and public exploit-reference metadata. Product matching comes from the published CVE records. A proof-of-concept means public code exists; it is not evidence of exploitation.