Skip to content

Unauthenticated SSRF Vulnerability in Streamlit on Windows (NTLM Credential Exposure)

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 24, 2026 in streamlit/streamlit • Updated Mar 27, 2026

Package

pip Streamlit (pip)

Affected versions

< 1.54.0

Patched versions

1.54.0

Description

Streamlit Open Source Security Advisory

1. Impacted Products

Streamlit Open Source versions prior to 1.54.0 running on Windows hosts.

2. Introduction

Snowflake Streamlit Open Source addressed a security vulnerability affecting Windows deployments related to improper handling and validation of filesystem paths within component request handling. The vulnerability was reported through the responsible disclosure program and has been remediated in Streamlit Open Source version 1.54.0. This issue affects only Streamlit deployments running on Windows operating systems.

3. Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) and NTLM Credential Exposure

3.1 Description

Streamlit was informed by a security researcher of an unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. The vulnerability arises from improper validation of attacker-supplied filesystem paths. In certain code paths, including within the ComponentRequestHandler, filesystem paths are resolved using os.path.realpath() or Path.resolve() before sufficient validation occurs.

On Windows systems, supplying a malicious UNC path (e.g., \\attacker-controlled-host\share) can cause the Streamlit server to initiate outbound SMB connections over port 445. When Windows attempts to authenticate to the remote SMB server, NTLMv2 challenge-response credentials of the Windows user running the Streamlit process may be transmitted.

This behavior may allow an attacker to:

  • Perform NTLM relay attacks against other internal services
  • Identify internally reachable SMB hosts via timing analysis

Note: The issue is unauthenticated and does not require user interaction.

Captured NTLMv2 challenge-response hashes could be subjected to offline brute-force attacks in an attempt to recover the associated plaintext account password. While NTLMv2 incorporates a server challenge (nonce) that mitigates the use of precomputed rainbow tables, it does not prevent targeted offline password cracking against weak credentials.

Additionally, Microsoft has publicly discouraged the continued use of NTLM in favor of Kerberos and is actively progressing toward disabling NTLM by default in future Windows releases. Organizations that enforce NTLM restrictions, disable outbound NTLM authentication, require SMB signing, or block NTLM authentication to remote servers can reduce or eliminate the risk associated with credential relay or hash exposure scenarios.

As NTLM is considered legacy and increasingly deprecated (though not fully sunset), environments that have already implemented Microsoft-recommended NTLM hardening controls are less likely to be materially impacted. The overall risk therefore depends on the organization's authentication configuration and network security posture.

3.2 Scenarios and Attack Vectors

Streamlit applications running on Windows were vulnerable if component endpoints were exposed to untrusted networks. By appending an attacker-controlled SMB hostname to the URI path and issuing a GET request, the Streamlit server could be coerced into initiating an outbound SMB authentication attempt.

This could result in the leakage of NTLMv2 credential hashes for the Windows account running the Streamlit process.

3.3 Resolution

  • The vulnerability has been fixed in Streamlit Open Source version 1.54.0.
  • It is recommended that all Streamlit deployments on Windows be upgraded immediately to version 1.54.0 or later.

4. Contact

Please contact security@snowflake.com for any questions regarding this advisory.

If a security vulnerability is discovered in a Streamlit product or website, it should be reported through the responsible disclosure program. For more information, see the Vulnerability Disclosure Policy.

References

@sfc-gh-pkamdar sfc-gh-pkamdar published to streamlit/streamlit Mar 24, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 25, 2026
Reviewed Mar 25, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Mar 26, 2026
Last updated Mar 27, 2026

Severity

Moderate

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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

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.
(14th percentile)

Weaknesses

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-33682

GHSA ID

GHSA-7p48-42j8-8846

Source code

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