Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.16% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE Intelligencetraefik · traefik
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-2272-4VV8-65WW ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch availableTraefik before 2.11.58 and 3.7.13 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated clients to skip client-certificate checks because negated Host matchers are counted as served domains. Attackers can reach backends protected by RequireAndVerifyClientCert when a router rule with !Host() creates a TLS options conflict that falls back to the default options.
Traefik before 2.11.58 and 3.7.13 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated clients to skip client-certificate checks because negated Host matchers are counted as served domains. Attackers can reach backends protected by RequireAndVerifyClientCert when a router rule with !Host() creates a TLS options conflict that falls back to the default options.
Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may bypass an access boundary or take over an account.
Traefik before 2.11.58 and 3.7.13 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated clients to skip client-certificate checks because negated Host matchers are counted as served domains. Attackers can reach backends protected by RequireAndVerifyClientCert when a router rule with !Host() creates a TLS options conflict that falls back to the default options.
Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may bypass an access boundary or take over an account.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-436: Interpretation Conflict. Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 22 Oct 2026 · Last source change 22 Oct 2026, 01:43 UTC · CWE-436 · Interpretation Conflict
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.