Juju has a resource poisoning vulnerability

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS 4.0

7.1 · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N · score source

EPSS

• CVE-2025-68153: 0.24% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 14.65 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

Summary Any authenticated user, machine or controller under a Juju controller can modify the resources of an application within the entire controller. This one is very straightforward to just read in the code: Step 1: The authorisation mechanism for the resource handler is defined here. One is only required to have been authed as either a user, machine or controller to pass this check. One requires no permissions on the controller nor does one need any further permissions on the models themselves. This handler is available under the following path format /:modeluuid/applications/:application/resources/:resources. See here. The handler defines no authorizer as supported by the handler struct here. One needs to know the following three bits of information to poison the resource cache on the controller: - model uuid - application name in the model - resource name in the model Given that a lot of deployments use the charm name for applications and the resources for charms are published…

Published by the source

3 Apr 2026, 18:29 UTC

Last modified by the source

27 Apr 2026, 16:43 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 15:19 UTC

1. Revision 1 · created · 26 Oct 2026

   Published from ghsa record GHSA-245v-p8fj-vwm2

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2025-68153

Advisory: Juju has a resource poisoning vulnerability
IDs: CVE-2025-68153, GHSA-245v-p8fj-vwm2
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2025-68153 (revision 1, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 15:19 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: High (CVSS 7.1)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: github.com/juju/juju 0.0.0-20260120044552-26ff93c903d5. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- Go github.com/juju/juju: affected < 0.0.0-20260120044552-26ff93c903d5; fixed in 0.0.0-20260120044552-26ff93c903d5

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- Go github.com/juju/juju: check the installed version with your package manager.

## Supported action
Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on github.com/juju/juju.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-245v-p8fj-vwm2 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-245v-p8fj-vwm2 lists affected ranges: Go github.com/juju/juju >=0 <0.0.0-20260120044552-26ff93c903d5)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.