Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-47205 is a medium-severity Use After Free (CWE-416) vulnerability in Envoyproxy Envoy. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 32th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-39828
Vulnerability Data
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy designed for cloud-native applications. From 1.36.0 until 1.36.9, 1.37.5, and 1.38.3, a Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability leading to a sudden segmentation fault exists in Envoy's ext_authz HTTP filter when processing per-route authorization…
more
overrides concurrently with rapid downstream client disconnects. During standard request lifecycles, Envoy instantiates the ext_authz filter with a foundational authorization client object (client_). If a matched route dictates a dynamic per-route HTTP or gRPC authorization service override, the filter generates a localized client. In the vulnerable implementation, this transient client aggressively overwrote the default client_ unique pointer by executing client_ = std::move(per_route_client). When a client rapidly establishes and subsequently tears down a stream (such as rapidly refreshing a protected WebSocket endpoint), the downstream triggers the ConnectionManagerImpl::doDeferredStreamDestroy() -> ActiveStream::onResetStream() lifecycle. Envoy immediately sequences Filter::onDestroy() in an attempt to securely abort dispatched asynchronous authorization check transactions via client_->cancel(). By destructing the default client abruptly during initiateCall, a memory lifecycle misalignment occurs within the async client manager. The stream teardown fails to reliably track and cancel the dynamically bound asynchronous authorization tasks, orchestrating a sequence where a late asynchronous callback from the network evaluates against a heavily destroyed ActiveStream validation span, generating a UAF process crash. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.36.9, 1.37.5, and 1.38.3.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V1.4.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover use-after-free bugs through dynamic analysis or fuzzing.
Engineering principles can require memory-safe constructs or languages that structurally avoid introducing use-after-free.
Process isolation confines the blast radius of use-after-free memory corruption to a single execution domain.
Memory protection controls limit exploitation impact by blocking unauthorized code execution from dangling pointers.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly incorporate memory-safety tooling and reviews that prevent most use-after-free defects.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover use-after-free issues via scanning or analysis but do not prevent their introduction.
Routine patching removes known use-after-free instances after they have been introduced in released software.
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 in development can detect use-after-free bugs before release.
Secure SDLC mandates memory-safety practices that reduce use-after-free defects.
Application security requirements can specify memory-management rules that mitigate use-after-free.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety design choices that limit use-after-free exposure.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe avoidance of use-after-free patterns.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.
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 (1 rule)
- V-248592 OL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230279 RHEL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-257794 RHEL 9 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416