CVE-2026-32694: Github.com/juju/juju Juju Affected By Confused Deputy Vulnerability
MODERATECVE-2026-32694 is a MODERATE (CVSS 6.6) juju affected by confused deputy vulnerability (CWE-343: Predictable Value Range from Previous Values) affecting Github.com/juju/juju libraries in the Go ecosystem. The issue involves juju affected by confused deputy idor attack via predictable user specified id in juju secrets. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec.
CVE-2026-32694 at a Glance
Security Impact
CVSS: 6.6
The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
How to Fix CVE-2026-32694
To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Github.com/juju/juju dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.
Upgrade github.com/juju/juju to 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec
Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:
inspect dependencies for github.com/juju/juju
How to Check if You Are Affected
To determine whether your application is affected by CVE-2026-32694, inspect your project dependencies for Github.com/juju/juju:
inspect dependencies for github.com/juju/juju
Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Github.com/juju/juju in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec), your application is affected.
Note: Verify declared build manifests and deployed runtime container environments.
Technical Details
Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis
This vulnerability is classified under CWE-343: Predictable Value Range from Previous Values, where the product's random number generator produces a series of values which, when observed, can be used to infer a relatively small range of possibilities for the next value that could be generated. In Github.com/juju/juju, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.
Source Advisory Statement
CVE-2026-32694 Affected Github.com/juju/juju Versions
1 component(s)| Product / Package | Ecosystem | Affected Versions | Fixed Version |
|---|---|---|---|
|
github.com/juju/juju
|
Go |
≥ 0.0.0-20221021155847-35c560704ee2
< 0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec
|
0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec
|
References
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-32694?
Which Github.com/juju/juju versions are affected?
What version fixes CVE-2026-32694?
Is github.com/juju/juju affected?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-32694?
What CWE is associated with CVE-2026-32694?
How can I check Go dependencies for CVE-2026-32694?
Machine-readable OSV JSON
OSV v1.5 Schema
{
"schema_version" : "1.4.0",
"id" : "GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p",
"modified" : "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
"published" : "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
"aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-32694" ],
"summary" : "Juju affected by Confused Deputy IDOR attack via Predictable user specified ID in Juju Secrets",
"details" : "### Summary\n\nPredictable secret ID and lack of secret origin API enable confused deputy attacks on Juju workloads.\n\n### Details\n\nA Juju application can create a secret and grant it to another integrated application (grantee).\n\nWhen they do so, the secret owner has to communicate the secret id to the grantee.\n\nThe grantee, having received the secret id can load the secret content and perform operations on behalf of the secret owner.\n\nHowever, today the grantee has no way to determine which granted secret belongs to which owner.\n\nInstead the grantee relies on:\n- being able to read the secret by id (secret was in fact granted, by some entity)\n- secret id was received over a relation (the remote end of the relation is presumed to be secret owner)\n\nAdditionally, secret IDs are XID, which are predictable, here two secrets created by two distinct apps in the same K8s model close in time:\n```\nd34vsl7mp25c76301hs0\ntime (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:28 (Unix 1758068308)\nmachine: f6c88a\npid: 50072\ncounter: 6294648\n\nd34vslfmp25c76301hsg\ntime (UTC): 2025-09-17 00:18:29 (Unix 1758068309)\nmachine: f6c88a\npid: 50072\ncounter: 6294649\n```\n\n### PoC\n\nThis allows for an IDOR attack where:\n- actors:\n - a **Good** application (the owner of the _Victim_),\n - an **Evil** application, and\n - a **Provider** application (the _Confused Deputy_)\n- relations: **Good** --- **Provider**, **Evil** --- **Provider**\n- secrets: **Good** and **Evil** create _Secrets_, granting them to the **Provider** and communicate _Secret IDs_ with the **Provider**.\n- semantics: the **Provider** performs some operation on behalf of the **Good**/**Evil** using the _Secret_.\n- weakness 1: **Evil** can guess the _Secret ID_ that **Good** granted and communicated to **Provider**.\n- weakness 2: _Juju_ doesn't provide the **Provider** application the facility to verify the provenance of the _Secret IDs_.\n- exploit: **Evil** passes **Good**'s secret id to **Provider**.\n- bypass: **Provider** performs _evil_ operation with **Good**'s _Secret ID_ on behalf of **Evil**.\n\n**Evil** could benefit by:\n- exfiltrating **Good**'s _Secret_ via reflection.\n- reading or mutating **Good**'s resources accessible via **Good*'s _Secret_.\n\n### Impact\n\nThis requires a complex setup.\n\nNot all shared secrets are used like above, so an actual exploit requires a very specific relation interface, specific semantics of the data in the databag, and an administrator having a reasonable need to deploy two apps (one evil, one good) related to the same (third) provider app.\n\nIf exploited, it can be very hard to determine what went wrong after the fact.\n\n### Suggested remediation\n\n#### 1. Longer, random secret IDs\n\nFor example, if the secret id was extended with a 128-bit nonce, guessing a sibling secret ID would be infeasible, and an attack of this style would require another weakness (e.g. secret IDs exposed in logs)\n\n#### 2. Grantee secret API\n\nToday, an app is not allowed to call `secret-info-get` on the granted secret.\nAdditionally, granted secrets are not included in the `secret-ids` output.\n\nSuppose that the Provider could run these hook tools:\n```command\n(provider/0)> secret-ids\nmy-own-secret-123\n\n(provider/0)> secret-ids --grants\ngood-secret-id-42\nevil-secret-id-43\n\n(provider/0)> secret-info-get good-secret-id-42\ngood-secret-id-42:\n revision: 1\n label: \"\"\n owner: good\n grant-relation-id: 12\n rotation: never\n```\n\nThe Provider would then able to validate the secret ID it's about to use against:\n- the relation in which the secret ID has been passed (good relation 12 or evil relation 14)\n- the application or unit name of the secret owner (good or evil)",
"severity" : [ {
"type" : "CVSS_V3",
"score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H"
} ],
"affected" : [ {
"package" : {
"ecosystem" : "Go",
"name" : "github.com/juju/juju"
},
"ranges" : [ {
"type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
"events" : [ {
"introduced" : "0.0.0-20221021155847-35c560704ee2"
}, {
"fixed" : "0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec"
} ]
} ]
} ],
"references" : [ {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-5cj2-rqqf-hx9p"
}, {
"type" : "ADVISORY",
"url" : "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32694"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/d06919eb03ec68156818bcc304b5fe1c39a8f9e9"
}, {
"type" : "PACKAGE",
"url" : "https://github.com/juju/juju"
} ],
"database_specific" : {
"cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-343" ],
"severity" : "MODERATE",
"github_reviewed" : true,
"github_reviewed_at" : "2026-03-19T17:43:47Z",
"nvd_published_at" : "2026-03-18T14:16:40Z"
}
}