CVE-2026-33726 — Cilium L7 proxy may bypass Kubernetes NetworkPolicy for same-node traffic
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 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.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+2
- Technical severity (medium)+3
The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.
CISA SSVC assessment CISA
Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Cilium Cilium).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (access control), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.4 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | 2.3 | 2.7 | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 5.4 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
| 4.3 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | 2.8 | 1.4 | nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
EPSS over time FIRST
Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.26%
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Audit administrative actions and access to resources outside each user’s normal pattern.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · cilium/cilium
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- Fix documented
- CVSS changed · 4.3
- Source status changed · → Analyzed
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
6 on the record
- github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-hxv8-4j4r-cqgv
- github.com/cilium/cilium/pull/44693
- docs.cilium.io/en/stable/operations/performance/tuning/
- docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/servicemesh/l7-traffic-management
- docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/concepts/routing/
- docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/kubernetes/policy/
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-56742 Cilium: Namespaced HTTPRoutes can redirect traffic to other namespaces Jul 15, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-56743 Cilium may unexpectedly allow ingress traffic from the local namespace when a Kubernetes NetworkPolicy is configured with an ipBlock match Jul 15, 2026
- High CVE-2026-49445 Cilium: Sensitive information disclosure and cluster disruption via local Envoy admin socket access Jul 15, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-53935 CiliumLocalRedirectPolicy addressMatcher allows cross-namespace service traffic hijacking and can break service translation Jul 7, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-41520 Cillium exposes sensitive information included in the cilium-bugtool debug archive May 8, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-26963 Cilium may not enforce host firewall policies when Native Routing, WireGuard and Node Encryption are enabled Feb 19, 2026
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record
Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-33726 is "Cilium L7 proxy may bypass Kubernetes NetworkPolicy for same-node traffic", rated Medium. It affects Cilium (Cilium); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 4.3 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.26% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.
Comments
Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.
No comments yet.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.