Severity by source
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Remote unauthenticated over HTTP (AV:N/PR:N/UI:N); AC:H because exploitation requires a specific tolerant-vs-strict proxy pairing; S:C because smuggling crosses the proxy trust boundary; no availability impact.
Primary rating from NVD.
CVSS VectorNVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Lifecycle Timeline
8DescriptionNVD
A flaw was found in Undertow. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to construct specially crafted requests where header names are parsed differently by Undertow compared to upstream proxies. This discrepancy in header interpretation can be exploited to launch request smuggling attacks, potentially bypassing security controls and accessing unauthorized resources.
AnalysisAI
HTTP request smuggling in Red Hat Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls by exploiting parsing discrepancies between Undertow and upstream proxies when handling crafted header names. The flaw (CWE-444) affects Undertow embedded in multiple Red Hat products including JBoss EAP 7/8, Data Grid 8, Fuse 7, and Apache Camel for Spring Boot 4, with Red Hat issuing patches via RHSA-2026:25125 and RHSA-2026:25126. There is no public exploit identified at time of analysis and EPSS is low (0.10%), but CVSS 9.1 and SSVC 'total' technical impact warrant prompt patching of internet-facing deployments.
Technical ContextAI
Undertow is the high-performance non-blocking HTTP server used as the embedded web layer in JBoss EAP/Wildfly and many Red Hat middleware products. CWE-444 (Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests, a.k.a. HTTP Request Smuggling) arises when two HTTP processors in a chain - typically a fronting proxy/load balancer and the origin server - disagree on where one request ends and the next begins. In this case Undertow's header-name parser tolerates or normalizes characters differently than upstream proxies, so an attacker can craft a single TCP message that the proxy treats as one request but Undertow splits into two, smuggling the trailing request past proxy-level auth, WAF, or routing rules.
RemediationAI
Apply Patch available per vendor advisory by installing the Red Hat errata RHSA-2026:25125 (https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25125) and RHSA-2026:25126 (https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25126), which update the Undertow packages shipped in the affected RHEL, JBoss EAP, Data Grid, Fuse, and Camel products; cross-reference https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28368 for the per-product fixed component versions. Where immediate patching is not possible, configure the fronting proxy to strictly validate and normalize HTTP header names (reject non-token characters, reject ambiguous Content-Length/Transfer-Encoding combinations) and terminate any connection that contains malformed headers - note this can break legitimate clients that send non-RFC-compliant headers. Disabling HTTP/1.1 connection reuse (keep-alive) between the proxy and Undertow also eliminates the smuggling primitive at the cost of significant throughput loss, and is only acceptable as a short-term mitigation.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow (the embedded web server underpinning JBoss EAP, Red Hat Data Grid, and Apache Camel
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to send `\r\r\r` as a header block terminator
Remote code execution in Red Hat Apache Camel Infinispan component allows low-privileged attackers to execute arbitrary
Same weakness CWE-444 – HTTP Request/Response Smuggling
View allSame technique Authentication Bypass
View allVendor StatusVendor
Share
External POC / Exploit Code
Leaving vuln.today
EUVD-2026-16696
GHSA-8v4x-mgvp-p658