CVE-2026-12382
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA flaw was found in the AAP Gateway Envoy proxy configuration. The non-mTLS route to EDA event streams does not remove the Subject HTTP header from client requests, despite the source code defining requestHeadersToRemove for this header. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject a spoofed Subject header matching a legitimate client certificate DN to bypass mTLS authentication and inject arbitrary events into protected EDA event streams.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA configuration flaw in the AAP Gateway Envoy proxy's non-mTLS route fails to remove the Subject HTTP header from incoming requests, despite the source code defining requestHeadersToRemove for this header. An unauthenticated attacker can inject a spoofed Subject header matching a legitimate client certificate's Distinguished Name to bypass mTLS authentication and inject arbitrary events into protected EDA event streams.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify AAP Gateway Envoy proxy configurationLocate the AAP Gateway Envoy proxy configuration files that handle routing to EDA event streamsAffected if Envoy proxy is deployed with routing to EDA event streams
-
Verify non-mTLS route to EDA existsExamine the Envoy configuration for routes to EDA event streams that do not require client certificate authenticationAffected if A non-mTLS route to EDA event streams is configured in Envoy
-
Inspect requestHeadersToRemove directiveReview the route configuration for the non-mTLS EDA route and locate any requestHeadersToRemove directivesAffected if The Subject header is not present in requestHeadersToRemove for the non-mTLS route
-
Confirm header removal is enforcedSend a test request containing a Subject HTTP header to the non-mTLS EDA endpoint and verify whether the header reaches the backend serviceAffected if The Subject header is present in requests reaching the EDA backend despite configuration
If a non-mTLS route to EDA event streams exists and the Subject header is not being removed from incoming requests, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataConfigure the Envoy proxy to properly remove the Subject HTTP header on the non-mTLS route by ensuring requestHeadersToRemove is correctly applied, or enforce strict mTLS validation that rejects requests without valid client certificates.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12382 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-12382 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data