CVE Intelligence
Medium

CVE-2026-53717 — Envoy Gateway: OCI layer extraction allocates make([]byte, h.Size) from untrusted tar header

Envoy Gateway is an open source project for managing Envoy Proxy as a standalone or Kubernetes-based application gateway. Prior to 1.7.4 and 1.8.1, internal/wasm/imagefetcher.go follows tenant-controlled EnvoyExtensionPolicy spec.wasm[].code.image.url values to Docker or OCI Wasm layers, and extractWasmPluginBinary uses the untrusted tar-header h.Size value to allocate memory before validating the entry name or declared size. A small PAX or GNU tar header can therefore claim a multi-terabyte entry even though the surrounding LimitReader restricts only the bytes read from the stream, and no registry allowlist prevents a permitted tenant from selecting an attacker-controlled registry that the controller can reach. The allocation is attempted for every tar entry and can cause an unrecoverable Go runtime out-of-memory failure; because the custom resource persists, reconciliation repeatedly crash-loops the shared controller and causes a single-request, non-volumetric, cluster-wide control-plane denial of service. This issue is fixed in versions 1.7.4 and 1.8.1.

Published Sep 14, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • 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.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
Envoyproxy
Gateway
CVSS base
6.5
Medium · 2 source(s)

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.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

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.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Envoyproxy Gateway).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Envoyproxy Gateway version < 1.7.4version >= 1.8.0-rc.0, < 1.8.1 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.8 3.6 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-789

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · envoyproxy/gateway
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 6.5
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 14, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

9 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Envoyproxy
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-789
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Medium CVE-2026-53718 Envoy Gateway custom backendRef cross-namespace ReferenceGrant bypass Sep 14, 2026
  • Medium CVE-2026-53719 Envoy Gateway: Nil-dereference when SecurityPolicy targets TCPRoute without spec.authorization Sep 14, 2026
  • Critical CVE-2026-53713 Envoy Gateway: Authentication Bypass via Improper Input Validation in EnvoyExtensionPolicy Lua Allows Secret Disclosure Sep 14, 2026
  • High CVE-2026-53714 Envoy Gateway: xDS Control Plane Information Disclosure when Envoy Gateway operates in GatewayNamespaceMode Sep 14, 2026
  • Medium CVE-2026-53715 Envoy Gateway: Wasm cache ServeHTTP reads mappingPath2Cache without lock Sep 14, 2026
  • Medium CVE-2026-53716 Envoy Gateway: Wasm HTTP fetch decompresses gzip without output-size limit Sep 14, 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 FIRST EPSS score.
  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • 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-2026-53717 is "Envoy Gateway: OCI layer extraction allocates make([]byte, h.Size) from untrusted tar header", rated Medium. It affects Gateway (Envoyproxy); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. 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.