Skip to content

CVE-2026-47101

Incorrect Authorization: is CVE-2026-47101real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
PoC (unverified)
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
8.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.7%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-863 · Incorrect Authorization
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

public exploits

links to sources — we don’t host code

Unverified proof-of-concept code has been published. It may or may not be functional — assess before relying on it.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →
Affected:Litellm

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

LiteLLM prior to 1.83.14 allows an authenticated internal_user to create API keys with access to routes that their role does not permit. When generating a key, the allowed_routes field is stored without verifying that the specified routes fall within the user's own permissions. A key created with access to admin-only routes can then be used to reach those routes successfully, bypassing the role-based access controls that would otherwise block the request, enabling full privilege escalation from internal_user to proxy_admin.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-47101
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-47101/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-47101)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-47101"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-47101/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-47101"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

0 verdicts
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-863 · Incorrect Authorization.