CVE-2026-2708
Redhat Enterprise Linux 10.0 … 9.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-2708 is a low-severity HTTP Request/Response Smuggling (CWE-444) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 3.7 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 25th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25306
Vulnerability Data
A request smuggling vulnerability exists in libsoup's HTTP/1 header parsing logic. The soup_message_headers_append_common() function in libsoup/soup-message-headers.c unconditionally appends each header value without validating for duplicate or conflicting Content-Length fields. This allows an attacker to send HTTP requests containing multiple Content-Length…
more
headers with differing values.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Request smuggling in public-facing HTTP library directly enables remote exploitation of web applications (T1190).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Rejects HTTP/1 requests containing duplicate or conflicting Content-Length headers before they reach libsoup's unconditional append logic.
Boundary devices (WAFs/proxies) can enforce HTTP header canonicalization and drop smuggling attempts before they reach the vulnerable soup_message_headers_append_common function.
Monitors inbound HTTP traffic for anomalous multi-valued Content-Length headers indicative of request-smuggling attempts against libsoup.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Configuration management can enforce uniform HTTP parsing rules across intermediaries, directly mitigating inconsistent interpretation.
Network monitoring can detect smuggling attempts via anomalous HTTP traffic or logs, while eliminating the inconsistency directly aids detection of such events.
Network protections can enforce consistent HTTP proxy/firewall behavior to block smuggling, and removing the weakness helps prevent unauthorized access via request smuggling.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect HTTP request smuggling vulnerabilities in intermediary components.
Network security controls can enforce consistent HTTP parsing and proxy behavior that mitigates request smuggling.
Secure network services include hardening proxies and gateways against inconsistent HTTP interpretation.
Secure SDLC practices require threat modeling and testing for HTTP parsing inconsistencies in intermediaries.
Application security requirements can mandate strict HTTP message validation and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles include consistent protocol handling and defense-in-depth for proxies.