CVE-2026-50149 (GCVE-0-2026-50149)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-08-19 14:16
Modified
2026-08-25 02:03
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
- CWE-295 - Improper Certificate Validation
Summary
Contour is a Kubernetes ingress controller using Envoy proxy. In versions 1.23.0 through 1.33.4, when an `HTTPProxy` is configured with incompatible combination of both `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` and `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`, Contour does not reject the configuration. Consequently, requests from clients that do not send TLS SNI or send an unrecognized SNI (one that does not match any `HTTPProxy` FQDN) bypass configured JWT verification and are proxied to upstream services without a valid token. This issue is fixed in Contour v1.33.5. Contour now rejects and marks invalid any `HTTPProxy` resources that combine `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` with `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Affected resources will receive a status condition with the error reason `TLSIncompatibleFeatures`. As a workaround, do not enable `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate` on `HTTPProxy` resources that also define `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Remove one of the two settings to avoid the invalid configuration.
References
| URL | Tags | |
|---|---|---|
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| projectcontour | contour |
Version: >= 1.23.0, < 1.33.5 |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-50149",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-08-25T02:03:02.855901Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-25T02:03:11.629Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "contour",
"vendor": "projectcontour",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 1.23.0, \u003c 1.33.5"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Contour is a Kubernetes ingress controller using Envoy proxy. In versions 1.23.0 through 1.33.4, when an `HTTPProxy` is configured with incompatible combination of both `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` and `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`, Contour does not reject the configuration. Consequently, requests from clients that do not send TLS SNI or send an unrecognized SNI (one that does not match any `HTTPProxy` FQDN) bypass configured JWT verification and are proxied to upstream services without a valid token. This issue is fixed in Contour v1.33.5. Contour now rejects and marks invalid any `HTTPProxy` resources that combine `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` with `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Affected resources will receive a status condition with the error reason `TLSIncompatibleFeatures`. As a workaround, do not enable `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate` on `HTTPProxy` resources that also define `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Remove one of the two settings to avoid the invalid configuration."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 6.5,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-295",
"description": "CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-19T14:16:21.476Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/projectcontour/contour/security/advisories/GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/projectcontour/contour/security/advisories/GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Contour has Improper JWT Verification for Non-SNI Requests on Virtual Hosts with Fallback Certificate Enabled"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-50149",
"datePublished": "2026-08-19T14:16:21.476Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-03T20:54:20.431Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-25T02:03:11.629Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-50149\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-08-25T02:03:02.855901Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-25T02:03:07.731Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Contour has Improper JWT Verification for Non-SNI Requests on Virtual Hosts with Fallback Certificate Enabled\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 6.5, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"MEDIUM\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N\", \"integrityImpact\": \"LOW\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"projectcontour\", \"product\": \"contour\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"\u003e= 1.23.0, \u003c 1.33.5\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/projectcontour/contour/security/advisories/GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/projectcontour/contour/security/advisories/GHSA-g3xr-5w5j-w4q4\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"Contour is a Kubernetes ingress controller using Envoy proxy. In versions 1.23.0 through 1.33.4, when an `HTTPProxy` is configured with incompatible combination of both `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` and `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`, Contour does not reject the configuration. Consequently, requests from clients that do not send TLS SNI or send an unrecognized SNI (one that does not match any `HTTPProxy` FQDN) bypass configured JWT verification and are proxied to upstream services without a valid token. This issue is fixed in Contour v1.33.5. Contour now rejects and marks invalid any `HTTPProxy` resources that combine `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate: true` with `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Affected resources will receive a status condition with the error reason `TLSIncompatibleFeatures`. As a workaround, do not enable `.spec.virtualhost.tls.enableFallbackCertificate` on `HTTPProxy` resources that also define `.spec.virtualhost.jwtProviders`. Remove one of the two settings to avoid the invalid configuration.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-295\", \"description\": \"CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-19T14:16:21.476Z\"}}}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-50149\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-25T02:03:11.629Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-06-03T20:54:20.431Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-08-19T14:16:21.476Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…