LangflowApplication

CVE-2026-10140

CRITICAL · 9.6 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-30
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 1.10.0 or later.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click 8 weeks old

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 voice mode contains improper shared-state handling that allows reuse of API clients across tenant boundaries. An authenticated attacker can manipulate cache state to cause requests from other users to be processed using incorrect upstream API credentials, leading to cross-tenant billing and accountability misattribution.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0-1.10.0 voice mode has improper shared-state handling in its caching layer. Authenticated attackers can manipulate cache state to cause API clients to be reused across tenant boundaries, resulting in requests from one tenant being processed with another tenant's upstream API credentials, causing cross-tenant billing and accountability issues.

MitigationImplement strict tenant isolation in the cache layer; ensure each tenant gets dedicated API client instances and cache keys are prefixed with tenant identifiers to prevent cross-tenant state leakage.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
LangflowApplication
Affected:>= 1.0.0, <= 1.10.0

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine installed Langflow version
    Run 'pip show langflow' or check the package.json/version file in the Langflow installation directory to obtain the exact version number
    Affected if The installed version falls within >= 1.0.0 and <= 1.10.0
  2. Identify if voice mode is enabled
    Inspect Langflow configuration files (config.yaml, settings.py, or environment variables) for voice mode settings such as VOICE_ENABLED, or check the frontend/admin UI for active voice integrations
    Affected if Voice mode is enabled or has been used in the deployment
  3. Examine the cache backend configuration
    Review the cache configuration in Langflow's config files, looking for Redis, Memcached, or in-memory cache settings; check if cache keys are prefixed with tenant identifiers
    Affected if Cache keys do not include tenant-specific prefixes or isolation markers
  4. Verify API client instance isolation
    Inspect the code or configuration governing API client reuse in the voice mode caching layer; check if API clients (credentials, sessions) are instantiated per-tenant or shared globally
    Affected if A single API client instance is being reused across different tenants or tenant contexts are not separated in the client pool
  5. Audit tenant context in cache lookups
    Review cache get/set operations in the voice mode code path to confirm whether tenant ID or tenant context is required as part of the cache key lookup
    Affected if Cache lookups do not require tenant context to retrieve stored API client state

A user is affected if they are running Langflow version 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 with voice mode enabled and the cache layer lacks tenant-specific isolation in API client storage and retrieval.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 1.10.0
Interim mitigation

Implement strict tenant isolation in the cache layer; ensure each tenant gets dedicated API client instances and cache keys are prefixed with tenant identifiers to prevent cross-tenant state leakage.

Fix this in Langflow Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA8.0 h
40.0 hours of engineering $6,920
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,072.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10140 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-10140 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data