CVE-2026-47778
Envoyproxy Envoy ≤ 1.35.13
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-47778 is a medium-severity Improper Neutralization of Null Byte or NUL Character (CWE-158) vulnerability in Envoyproxy Envoy. Its CVSS base score is 4.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 11th 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) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-39818
Vulnerability Data
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy designed for cloud-native applications. Prior to 1.35.11, 1.36.7, 1.37.3, and 1.38.1, a structural flaw was identified in DefaultCertValidator::verifySubjectAltName where the extracted DNS SAN string is cast to a C-style string using…
more
.c_str() before being passed to the Utility::dnsNameMatch() algorithm. If the attacker serves a certificate with a dNSName SAN containing an embedded NUL byte, the helper Utility::generalNameAsString captures the complete string including the NUL. However, when .c_str() evaluates it, implicit conversion to absl::string_view inside dnsNameMatch relies on strlen(), prematurely truncating the evaluation context. Envoy evaluates trucated string against the exact required config_san match and returns true, thereby successfully validating the string with the Nul byte for an upstream routing. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.35.11, 1.36.7, 1.37.3, and 1.38.1.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.10
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly requires neutralizing or rejecting malformed characters such as NUL before they reach downstream components.
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 require input neutralization and validation to prevent null-byte flaws.
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 null-byte flaws but does not itself implement the neutralization.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and sanitization that directly prevents null-byte injection.
Application security requirements include explicit rules for neutralizing dangerous characters such as NUL.
Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of unsafe data flows but do not prescribe character neutralization.
Secure coding standards explicitly require proper neutralization of null bytes and other metacharacters.