dbcve.org
Openshift Container PlatformApplication · Redhat

CVE-2026-46579

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A flaw was found in the OpenShift Router. When a Route has `insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy` set to Allow, the HTTP frontend does not remove `X-SSL-Client-*` headers from incoming requests. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to send plain HTTP requests with crafted `X-SSL-Client-*` headers. As a result, backends relying on these headers for mutual TLS (Transport Layer Security) authentication can be bypassed, enabling the attacker to impersonate client certificate identities.

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 confidence

The OpenShift Router fails to remove X-SSL-Client-* headers from plain HTTP requests when a Route has insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy set to Allow. An unauthenticated attacker can inject these headers to impersonate client certificate identities, bypassing mutual TLS authentication enforced by backends.

MitigationConfigure Routes to use 'None' or 'Redirect' instead of 'Allow' for insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy, or implement backend-side validation to not trust X-SSL-Client-* headers from non-TLSoriginated requests.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
Openshift Container PlatformApplication
Affected:= 4.0
Openshift RouterApplication
Affected:all versions

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
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify OpenShift Router deployment
    Run 'oc get deployment -n openshift-ingress router' to find the router deployment in the openshift-ingress namespace
    Affected if OpenShift Router is deployed (this is the vulnerable component)
  2. Check router version
    Run 'oc get deployment -n openshift-ingress router -o jsonpath='{.spec.template.spec.containers[0].image}'' to get the router image version
    Affected if Router version is unpatched (compare to vendor advisory for fixed versions)
  3. Find routes with insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy Allow
    Run 'oc get routes -o jsonpath='{range .items[?(@.spec.tls.insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy=="Allow")]}{.metadata.name}{.metadata.namespace}{"\n"}{end}'' to list all routes using Allow policy
    Affected if Any routes exist with insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy set to Allow
  4. Check if affected routes use X-SSL-Client-* headers
    Review backend application configuration to determine if it trusts X-SSL-Client-* headers for client certificate authentication. Inspect route target services and their documentation for mTLS client cert verification using these headers.
    Affected if Backend services rely on X-SSL-Client-* headers for mutual TLS authentication on routes with Allow policy

A user is affected if they have routes with insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy: Allow and backend services that trust X-SSL-Client-* headers for client authentication.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Configure Routes to use 'None' or 'Redirect' instead of 'Allow' for insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy, or implement backend-side validation to not trust X-SSL-Client-* headers from non-TLSoriginated requests.

Fix this in Openshift Container Platform Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
21.0 hours of engineering $3,680
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-46579 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-46579 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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