CVE-2026-33726
Published: 27 March 2026
Summary
CVE-2026-33726 is a medium-severity Improper Access Control (CWE-284) vulnerability in Cilium Cilium. Its CVSS base score is 5.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Disable or Modify System Firewall (T1686); ranked at the 15.4th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16503
Vulnerability details
Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Prior to versions 1.17.14, 1.18.8, and 1.19.2, Ingress Network Policies are not enforced for traffic from pods to L7 Services (Envoy, GAMMA) with a local backend on the…
more
same node, when Per-Endpoint Routing is enabled and BPF Host Routing is disabled. Per-Endpoint Routing is disabled by default, but is automatically enabled in deployments using cloud IPAM, including Cilium ENI on EKS (`eni.enabled`), AlibabaCloud ENI (`alibabacloud.enabled`), Azure IPAM (`azure.enabled`, but not AKS BYOCNI), and some GKE deployments (`gke.enabled`; managed offerings such as GKE Dataplane V2 may use different defaults). It is typically not enabled in tunneled deployments, and chaining deployments are not affected. In practice, Amazon EKS with Cilium ENI mode is likely the most common affected environment. Versions 1.17.14, 1.18.8, and 1.19.2 contain a patch. There is currently no officially verified or comprehensive workaround for this issue. The only option would be to disable per-endpoint routes, but this will likely cause disruptions to ongoing connections, and potential conflicts if running in cloud providers.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Bypass of Cilium network policy enforcement enables impairment of container network firewall controls under specific routing conditions.
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
The access control policy and procedures directly mandate and enforce proper access control mechanisms across the organization.
Supervision and review of access control activities directly detects and remediates improper access configurations or usages.
Associating and retaining security attributes with data directly supports enforcement of access control decisions across storage, processing, and transmission.
Requiring prior authorization for each remote access type prevents improper access control over remote connections.
Requiring authorization of wireless access before allowing connections enforces proper access control for this access method.
Requiring authorization and configuration controls for mobile device connections directly enforces access control and prevents unauthorized devices from reaching organizational systems.
Defining account types, requiring approvals for creation, specifying authorizations, monitoring usage, and reviewing accounts directly prevents improper access control by ensuring only authorized accounts exist and are used.
Enforces rules governing access to the system and its data from external systems based on established trust relationships.