CVE-2026-50052
CVE-2026-50052 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Intelligence
In Vinyl Cache before 9.0.1 and Varnish Cache before 9.0.3, a deficiency in HTTP/2 request parsing can be exploited to launch a backend request desync attack (request smuggling), which in turn can be used for cache poisoning, authentication bypass, or possibly even information disclosure and manipulation. The attack vector only exists if HTTP/2 support is enabled by setting the feature parameter to contain +http2. HTTP/2 support is disabled by default.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, mitre
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
2.3
LOW
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 (2)
Products (3)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.3 | CVSS 4.0 | LOW | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-444
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /2.
References
2 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
- the vinyl cache projectevery CVE for this vendor
- varnish softwareevery CVE for this vendor
- CWE-444other 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.