CVE-2026-104355

NVD	https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-104355
CWE	https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/863.html

A connected peer cluster can modify a Temporal Server clusters local namespaces, which are never replicated to that peer, because the receiving cluster applies inbound namespace replication updates to them. In a multi-cluster deployment, each cluster pulls replication tasks from the remote clusters an administrator has registered with connection enabled; the sending side excludes local namespaces, but the receiving side does not apply the same rule. When an inbound task names an existing namespace, the server checks at most that the namespace identifiers match, then overwrites its state, description, owner, retention, archival settings, and cluster list, and its active cluster when the task carries a higher failover version, without checking that the namespace is global. A party that controls a registered peers replies, by operating or compromising it, can therefore change any local namespace whose name and identifier it can supply, without any credential on the receiving cluster: for example, marking it Deprecated, making the peer its active cluster, and shortening its retention, after which new Workflow starts in that namespace fail. Local namespaces include the built-in temporal-system namespace. Namespace metadata the History service refreshes from the peer while processing its history replication tasks passes through the same logic. A cluster with no remote cluster registered with connection enabled is not exposed.

Weakness

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.

Potential Mitigations

Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page.
One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.

Incorrect Authorization

Weakness

Potential Mitigations

References