CVE-2026-108760
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-108760 is a high-severity Binding to an Unrestricted IP Address (CWE-1327) vulnerability in Hackmd (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 14th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and CM-6 (Configuration Settings) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-96925
Vulnerability Data
LlamaFarm through 0.0.34 contains an insecure default configuration that binds its unauthenticated FastAPI server to 0.0.0.0 on port 14345, while the lf CLI silently discards HOST overrides. Network-adjacent attackers can call the project and dataset management API to read stored…
more
provider API keys, modify projects, trigger ingestion, and irreversibly delete projects.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces approved information flow policies that would disallow unrestricted remote bindings.
Establishes the most restrictive configuration settings, which would require binding only to specific addresses rather than 0.0.0.0.
Requires control of communications at external and key internal interfaces, preventing binding that accepts traffic from any source.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Documenting authorized network flows informs correct bind decisions and reduces the chance of 0.0.0.0 usage.
Network protection controls directly prevent exposure via unrestricted binds while fixing the weakness addresses only one vector of unauthorized access.
Configuration management enforces restricted bind addresses, covering the weakness completely but only one aspect of overall hardening.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Network security controls directly require restricting listening interfaces to specific addresses rather than 0.0.0.0.
A.8.21 requires identifying, requiring and monitoring security features (including authentication, authorization and network connection controls) from providers and formulating rules on allowed networks/services; it does not stop a product from binding to 0.0.0.0 and the weakness remains exploitable until the binding itself is changed.
Network segregation can limit the blast radius of an unrestricted binding but does not prevent the binding itself.
Secure architecture principles discourage exposing services on all interfaces, though the control is broader than this single weakness.
Secure coding guidance can catch hard-coded 0.0.0.0 bindings during development but is not the primary mitigation.