Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.41% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-48794High confidence
Authelia has an Edge Case Access Control Rule Mismatch
authelia · authelia
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-J748-H363-WQJ8 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
1.3LowCVSS 4.0
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedLow technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityLow→Operational priority:Low, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs authelia authelia and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges1 source-attributed range
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gogithub.com/authelia/authelia/v4 | >= 4.36.0, <= 4.39.19 | 4.39.20 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 26 Jun 2026 |
Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
Authelia is an open-source authentication and authorization server providing two-factor authentication and single sign-on (SSO) for applications via a web portal. In versions 4.36.0 through 4.39.19, due to lack of canonicalization of domains in very specific edge cases, an access control rule may be skipped when it should match a request. The specific conditions that could lead to a security issue for vulnerability are: 1. The specific target resource of the attack must be using the forwarded authorization integration; 2. The requested domain must have two additional segments compared to a session domain i.e. `a.b.example.com` is requested, but the session domain is `example.com`; 3. There access control rules must specify two separate rules which both contain inexact domain matches such as `*.b.example.com` and `*.example.com` i.e. wildcards, username matches, group matches; 4. The rules must be in order of most specific domain to least specific domain; 5. The second rule must be more permissive than the first rule; 6. The attacker must specifically request a URL for the more specific domain, with the second part containing one or more capitalized letters i.e. `https://a.B.example.com` and no other segment with capitalized letters; 7. The integration used must not be the Envoy ExtAuthz integration; and 8. The proxy must not canonicalize the requested host name in the relevant header before sending it to the relevant authorization endpoint. The kind of configuration used to produce this issue and result in a `bypass` rule being matched has long been highly discouraged. Essentially hosts which should be bypassed entirely should not be secured by having the proxy check them with the authorization handlers. Upgrade to 4.39.20 to receive a patch.
What
Authelia is an open-source authentication and authorization server providing two-factor authentication and single sign-on (SSO) for applications via a web portal. In versions 4.36.0 through 4.39.19, due to lack of canonicalization of domains in very specific edge cases, an access control rule may be skipped when it should match a request. The specific conditions that could lead to a security issue for vulnerability are: 1. The specific target resource of the attack must be using the forwarded authorization integration; 2. The requested domain must have two additional segments compared to a session domain i.e. `a.b.example.com` is requested, but the session domain is `example.com`; 3. There access control rules must specify two separate rules which both contain inexact domain matches such as `*.b.example.com` and `*.example.com` i.e. wildcards, username matches, group matches; 4. The rules must be in order of most specific domain to least specific domain; 5. The second rule must be more permissive than the first rule; 6. The attacker must specifically request a URL for the more specific domain, with the second part containing one or more capitalized letters i.e. `https://a.B.example.com` and no other segment with capitalized letters; 7. The integration used must not be the Envoy ExtAuthz integration; and 8. The proxy must not canonicalize the requested host name in the relevant header before sending it to the relevant authorization endpoint. The kind of configuration used to produce this issue and result in a `bypass` rule being matched has long been highly discouraged. Essentially hosts which should be bypassed entirely should not be secured by having the proxy check them with the authorization handlers. Upgrade to 4.39.20 to receive a patch.
Why
The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Authelia is an open-source authentication and authorization server providing two-factor authentication and single sign-on (SSO) for applications via a web portal. In versions 4.36.0 through 4.39.19, due to lack of canonicalization of domains in very specific edge cases, an access control rule may be skipped when it should match a request. The specific conditions that could lead to a security issue for vulnerability are: 1. The specific target resource of the attack must be using the forwarded authorization integration; 2. The requested domain must have two additional segments compared to a session domain i.e. `a.b.example.com` is requested, but the session domain is `example.com`; 3. There access control rules must specify two separate rules which both contain inexact domain matches such as `*.b.example.com` and `*.example.com` i.e. wildcards, username matches, group matches; 4. The rules must be in order of most specific domain to least specific domain; 5. The second rule must be more permissive than the first rule; 6. The attacker must specifically request a URL for the more specific domain, with the second part containing one or more capitalized letters i.e. `https://a.B.example.com` and no other segment with capitalized letters; 7. The integration used must not be the Envoy ExtAuthz integration; and 8. The proxy must not canonicalize the requested host name in the relevant header before sending it to the relevant authorization endpoint. The kind of configuration used to produce this issue and result in a `bypass` rule being matched has long been highly discouraged. Essentially hosts which should be bypassed entirely should not be secured by having the proxy check them with the authorization handlers. Upgrade to 4.39.20 to receive a patch.
Why
The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-178 ↗
CWE-178: Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity. The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N/E:PCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCLowVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VINoneVulnerable-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCLowSubsequent-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- authelia: >= 4.36.0, < 4.39.20
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 19 Jun 2026 · Last source change 22 Jun 2026, 19:51 UTC · CWE-178 · Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-38083
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.