Skip to content

Pelican Web UI Affected by a Privilege Escalation Attack

Critical severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 23, 2026 in PelicanPlatform/pelican • Updated May 13, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/pelicanplatform/pelican (Go)

Affected versions

< 0.0.0-20260408120501-7f73b9c3e677

Patched versions

0.0.0-20260408120501-7f73b9c3e677

Description

Background

On April 2nd, 2026, a Claude coding agent alerted Pelican PI Brian Bockelman to a privilege escalation vulnerability affecting Pelican's Web User Interface (WebUI) for various versions between v7.21 and v7.24. Upon further investigation, the Pelican team discovered this attack allows any user authenticated to the WebUI via OAuth to gain admin privileges under certain configurations. These may include servers with the following configuration variables enabled:

  • Server.UIAdminUsers: Affected if any of the listed admin users or the default admin account have not previously logged in to the server.
  • Server.AdminGroups: Affected if Issuer.GroupSource is set to internal and an admin of the group has not previously logged in to the server.

The OSDF operations team has mitigated these for core services, origins, and caches operated by the PATh project. However, mitigation may be needed for caches and origins not centrally operated.

Pelican Command Line has not currently identified any evidence this attack has been exploited in the services managed by OSDF operators.

Severity and Impact

When leveraged, an attacker with any kind of authenticated session on the server can create database records that cause the server to grant them admin privileges on subsequent login. Critically, admin access enables modifying the server's configuration, creating persistent API tokens, and changing admin passwords. The table below summarizes potential implications of this exploit.

Service Data exposure risk Data tampering risk Federation-wide impact
Director Low (no data stored) High — can modify configuration to point to a different Registry High — can modify configuration to add GeoIP overrides to steer federation. Denial of service on the federation
Registry Low High — can modify existing or create malicious namespaces that impersonate trusted paths High — federation-wide namespace poisoning. Denial of service on the federation
Origin High — can expose protected paths via config or export object store/filesystem paths into a namespace High — can potentially enable writes + change export paths Medium — scoped to that origin's namespaces
Cache Medium — can expose cached protected data via config changes Low — caches don't originate data Low — scoped to that cache

Attack Preconditions

Both attacks share the same prerequisites:

  1. The server's OIDC logins must be enabled.
  2. The attacker must have some form of authenticated session on the server, typically from an OIDC login.
  3. The attacker must know or guess a relevant admin identifier (a Server.UIAdminUsers username or a Server.AdminGroups group name) for an admin who has not previously logged into the WebUI.

Immediate Mitigation Steps

1. Audit the consuming service's database

Before upgrading, Pelican Command Line recommends auditing the service's database to see if it has already been exploited and to block further exploitation. Upgrading an exploited server is insufficient to prevent future unauthorized access if the exploit has already occurred.

Pelican Command Line is providing a script mitigate-user-escalation.sh that:

  • Displays all user records and group memberships for manual review, highlighting any that show fingerprints of the attack with [!] for explicit review — administrators should verify all entries, but especially those with this syntax highlighting. The highlighted changes do not guarantee an exploit occurred but that further examination is needed.
  • Creates database records mitigating the attack vector.
  • Displays all API tokens, which may have been created by an attacker for persistent access, for administrator review. Suspicious tokens should be deleted using the provided SQLite commands.
  • Provides additional guidance about rotating secrets on the server.

This script is available as a github gist: https://gist.github.com/jhiemstrawisc/8c4b2b3ec5cb2ca06537d9439dc16cc9

To run the script:

# Run as the same user that runs the Pelican server (e.g., pelican):
$ sudo bash mitigate-user-escalation.sh

# If using a non-standard config file:
$ sudo bash mitigate-user-escalation.sh --config /path/to/pelican.yaml

# If the database is in a non-standard location:
$ sudo bash mitigate-user-escalation.sh --db-path /path/to/pelican.sqlite

2. Upgrade to a patched version

Administrators for Pelican servers running an affected version should upgrade to a patched release. Within each minor release series, these versions include:

  • >=v7.21.5
  • >=v7.22.3
  • >=v7.23.3
  • >=v7.24.2

Administrators can check their server's version by invoking pelican with the --version flag, or by inspecting the WebUI's ? icon displayed in the lower left corner.

3. Disable vulnerable configuration if not upgrading immediately

If administrators are unable to upgrade to a patched version, disable the vulnerable configuration by commenting or removing the relevant settings from the service's pelican.yaml:

Server:
  # Comment or remove these lines:
  # UIAdminUsers:
  #   - user1
  #   - user2
  # AdminGroups:
  #   - admin-group

Note: Disabling Server.UIAdminUsers removes OIDC-based admin access entirely, leaving only password-based login for admin access. Ensure the project has a working admin password before making this change.

If a server doesn't currently configure Server.UIAdminUsers or Server.AdminGroups, do not populate these settings until the administrator has upgraded to a patched version. If their project doesn't currently have these configured but have in the past, they should still audit the records using the provided mitigation script.

Long-Term Fixes

In addition to closing the immediate vulnerabilities, the Pelican development team is working toward several defense-in-depth solutions to minimize the risk of similar vulnerabilities in the future. These include:

  • Reviewing all code in the vicinity of these vulnerabilities for other attack vectors.
  • Changing internal frameworks so security implications of new APIs are more visible to code reviewers.
  • Automating security scanning using coding agents like the one that discovered this class of vulnerabilities.

References

@jhiemstrawisc jhiemstrawisc published to PelicanPlatform/pelican Apr 23, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 4, 2026
Reviewed May 4, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 9, 2026
Last updated May 13, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(13th percentile)

Weaknesses

Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-42571

GHSA ID

GHSA-rpfr-x88x-xwcw

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.