GHSA-RGPG-CPWG-4F45
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-04 12:31 – Updated: 2026-09-04 12:31Traefik versions >= v3.7.0 and <= v3.7.10 contain an authentication bypass in the Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider. The TLS option generated for an Ingress carrying the nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/auth-tls-secret annotation was named after the Ingress namespace and name. As a result, two Ingress objects sharing the same host, the same client CA secret, and the same client-authentication mode produced two distinct TLS option names for that host. Traefik treats this as a TLS options conflict and falls back to the entry point's default TLS configuration, which does not request a client certificate, so a route configured with nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/auth-tls-verify-client: "on" becomes reachable without a client certificate. Only the v3.7 line is affected; the issue is fixed in v3.7.11.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-85596"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-04T12:17:23Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Traefik versions \u003e= v3.7.0 and \u003c= v3.7.10 contain an authentication bypass in the Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider. The TLS option generated for an Ingress carrying the nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/auth-tls-secret annotation was named after the Ingress namespace and name. As a result, two Ingress objects sharing the same host, the same client CA secret, and the same client-authentication mode produced two distinct TLS option names for that host. Traefik treats this as a TLS options conflict and falls back to the entry point\u0027s default TLS configuration, which does not request a client certificate, so a route configured with nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/auth-tls-verify-client: \"on\" becomes reachable without a client certificate. Only the v3.7 line is affected; the issue is fixed in v3.7.11.",
"id": "GHSA-rgpg-cpwg-4f45",
"modified": "2026-09-04T12:31:00Z",
"published": "2026-09-04T12:31:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/traefik/traefik/security/advisories/GHSA-j994-9gqj-9hwq"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-85596"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/traefik-3.7-authentication-bypass-via-tls-option-conflict"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.