CVE-2026-76259
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 · uneditedIn Splunk Enterprise for Windows versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, 9.4.13, and 9.3.14, a local user with access to the Windows host could bind to the management port before Splunk Enterprise starts, intercept authentication tokens from child processes, and use those tokens to compromise all relevant data and system integrity available to the user account running Splunk Enterprise. The vulnerability is possible because the Windows management-port listener does not apply exclusive address binding protections before the service starts.
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 analysisPrivileges are granted, or fail to be dropped, incorrectly, so an action runs with more power than it should. An attacker who reaches that path inherits the excess privilege. The fix is least-privilege throughout, with explicit, checked transitions whenever privilege changes.
General guidance for the improper privilege management class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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>= 9.3.0, < 9.3.14>= 9.4.0, < 9.4.13>= 10.0.0, < 10.0.9>= 10.2.0, < 10.2.6>= 10.4.0, < 10.4.2CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
dbcve · scoped9.3.149.4.1310.0.9
10.4.2 (or 10.2.6, 10.0.9, 9.4.13, or 9.3.14 depending on your current major version branch)
- 1. Identify the current Splunk Enterprise version by navigating to Settings > About > About Splunk Enterprise in the web interface, or running: splunk --version in the command line
- 2. Determine which upgrade path is appropriate based on your current major version (e.g., if on 10.x upgrade to 10.4.2, if on 10.2.x upgrade to 10.2.6, etc.)
- 3. Review Splunk Upgrade Planning documentation and release notes for your target version
- 4. Create a full backup of your Splunk Enterprise environment including the $SPLUNK_HOME directory and any external storage
- 5. Test the upgrade in a non-production environment first
- 6. Stop Splunk Enterprise service: splunk stop
- 7. Run the installer for the fixed version (10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, 9.4.13, or 9.3.14 depending on your upgrade path)
- 8. Start Splunk Enterprise service: splunk start
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-76259 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-76259 in production — separate from our analysis above.
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.
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.
- 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