Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-41174 is a medium-severity Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization (CWE-653) vulnerability in Traefik Traefik. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Escape to Host (T1611); ranked at the 17th 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 AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-26432
Vulnerability Data
Traefik is an HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer. Prior to versions 2.11.43, 3.6.14, and 3.7.0-rc.2, there is a potential vulnerability in Traefik's Kubernetes CRD provider cross-namespace isolation enforcement. When providers.kubernetesCRD.allowCrossNamespace=false, Traefik correctly rejects direct cross-namespace middleware references from IngressRoute…
more
objects, but fails to apply the same restriction to middleware references nested inside a Chain middleware's spec.chain.middlewares[]. An actor with permission to create or update Traefik CRDs in their own namespace can exploit this to cause Traefik to resolve and apply middleware objects from another namespace, bypassing the documented isolation boundary. This issue has been patched in versions 2.11.43, 3.6.14, and 3.7.0-rc.2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 12 hardening rules · 9 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
AC-3 directly requires correct enforcement of authorization decisions on every access request, structurally preventing incorrect checks.
Security function isolation is the canonical mechanism for protecting higher-privilege compartments.
Process isolation maintains separate execution domains so one process cannot affect another’s privilege level.
AC-24 ensures access-control decisions are made and applied consistently, reducing the chance of an incorrect authorization result.
A reference monitor that is always invoked and tamper-proof forces every authorization decision through a verified, correct path.
Explicit separation of user and management functionality implements the required compartmentalization.
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.
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.
Segregation of duties directly enforces separation of privilege levels and functions.
Network segregation is a classic technical control for isolating different privilege domains.
Secure system architecture principles explicitly call for isolation and least-privilege boundaries.
Separation of development, test and production environments is a direct application of compartmentalization.
Access control policies establish the boundaries that isolation must enforce.
Managing access rights is the operational mechanism for compartmentalizing privileges.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
- V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
RHEL 7 (1 rule)
- V-204430 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must re-authenticate for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-251712 The RHEL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
- V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
- V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-653
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653