CWE-1188Weakness · CWE-1188

CVE-2026-14474

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-07-07

Mitigation only

No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.

See remediation →

94/100

Remediation priority · Urgent

Remotely reachable Zero-click 7 weeks old

Official description

NVD · unedited

A flaw was found in SSSD's LDAP sudo provider. When the ldap_sudo_search_base option is not explicitly configured, SSSD searches the entire LDAP directory tree for sudoRole objects. An authenticated attacker with write access to any subtree can inject a sudoRole object granting root-level sudo privileges on all SSSD-enrolled hosts.

Technical summary

dbcve analysis · high confidence

SSSD's LDAP sudo provider searches the entire LDAP directory tree for sudoRole objects when ldap_sudo_search_base is not explicitly configured. An authenticated attacker with write access to any subtree in the LDAP directory can inject a malicious sudoRole object, granting themselves root-level sudo privileges on all SSSD-enrolled hosts.

MitigationExplicitly configure the ldap_sudo_search_base option in sssd.conf to limit the search scope to the specific organizational unit containing legitimate sudoRole objects, preventing unauthorized subtree access.

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

CVSS breakdown

From the vector

Attack vector: Network
Complexity: Low
Privileges: Low
User interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

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

Am I affected?

dbcve checks

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

Verify SSSD is installed and the LDAP sudo provider is in use

Check if sssd.conf exists (typically /etc/sssd/sssd.conf) and contains a [sudo] section or ldap_sudo_search_base references

Affected if SSSD is running with LDAP sudo provider enabled and no explicit ldap_sudo_search_base is set in the configuration
Confirm ldap_sudo_search_base is not explicitly configured

Search sssd.conf for 'ldap_sudo_search_base' option under the [domain/...] or [sudo] section. If absent or commented out, the default applies

Affected if The option is missing, commented, or not set, causing SSSD to search the entire LDAP tree for sudoRole objects
Determine the effective LDAP search base

If ldap_sudo_search_base is unset, SSSD falls back to the base DN defined by ldap_search_base or the system default. Review the domain configuration section for the base DN

Affected if The search base is not scoped to a specific organizational unit, meaning SSSD will discover sudoRole objects from any LDAP subtree the bind account can access
Check LDAP access permissions for the SSSD service account

Review what LDAP subtrees the SSSD bind DN (or service account) has read access to. This is typically configured in the LDAP server or via ACLs

Affected if The SSSD service account can read any part of the LDAP directory tree, allowing it to pick up sudoRole objects from untrusted subtrees

A user is affected if SSSD uses the LDAP sudo provider without an explicitly scoped ldap_sudo_search_base, allowing sudoRole objects from any accessible LDAP subtree to be automatically imported and applied.

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

Remediation

From vendor data

Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime

Mitigation

Explicitly configure the ldap_sudo_search_base option in sssd.conf to limit the search scope to the specific organizational unit containing legitimate sudoRole objects, preventing unauthorized subtree access.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory

Consultation3.0 h
Implementation2.0 h
Testing3.0 h
Review / QA2.0 h

10.0 hours of engineering $1,770

Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,832.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally

dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-14474 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-14474 in production — separate from our analysis above.

Notes0 Guidelines

Know something about CVE-2026-14474?

The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.

The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
A config change or rule that shut the vector down
A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon

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

At a glance

A fix existsA vendor remedy is published

Severity 8.8 High

Exploit likelihood EPSS, next 30 days 0.6%

Remediation

A high-priority fix

Have this fixed 10 hrs · Moderate

Typical engagement from $1,770

Get a fix See the full breakdown ↓

A high-priority vulnerability. Send your environment and a specialist will scope CVE-2026-14474 and return a fixed quote and timeline.

You’ll deal with our team directly and deploy the reviewed fix to staging first — never straight to production.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Check your environment

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.

Scan for this in your stack

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

Practitioner notes

No notes yet

Official description

Technical summary

CVSS breakdown

Am I affected?

Remediation

References