CVE-2026-47692
CVE-2026-47692 — Envoy: PROXY Protocol v2 header generator emits "skipped" TLVs, causing 65 KB attacker-controlled spillover into the upstream application stream
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy designed for cloud-native applications. From 1.34.0 until 1.35.13, 1.36.9, 1.37.5, and 1.38.3, PROXY Protocol v2 header generator emits TLVs beyond the maximum length of 65535 bytes, causing a mismatch between bytes written and the length field in the header. This can result in smuggled bytes on the upstream request. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.35.13, 1.36.9, 1.37.5, and 1.38.3.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Unreported
no source claims exploitation
EPSS
0%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
CVSS base
4.8
MEDIUM
CISA SSVC assessment
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 all four kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component
Affected scope
The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.
Vendors (1)
Products (1)
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.8 | CVSS 3.1 | MEDIUM | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-130
References
1 on the record
- github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/security/advisories/GHSA-wh36-hm39-mm3r
x_refsource_CONFIRM
Elsewhere on this site
- envoyproxyevery CVE for this vendor
- CWE-130other pages naming this weakness
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.