VulnerabilityPublished 11 Aug 2026Updated 27 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-71475: insights-client · Path Traversal

Source GCVE Database

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-71475· Medium 6.8

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.8 Medium · fixed in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.13 package updates : update Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.13 when convenient.

Data as of 9 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.8Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 53% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.17.1

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Aug 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 10 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

ghsa-gqvx-3g3q-49g9

What to do

Patches and advisories

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.14	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.15	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.16	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.17	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released a security update in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes version 2.17.1 that addresses this vulnerability. Users should apply this update to remediate the issue. Prior to applying this update, ensure all previously released relevant errata are applied. Refer to Red Hat's official advisory RHSA-2026:60386 and the update instructions at https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258 for detailed guidance. No additional mitigations are specified or required beyond applying the official fix.

Description

A vulnerability in insights-client allows a compromised managed cluster ('spoke') to inject unencoded data into the Insights API URL path. This occurs because the ClusterID, controlled by the spoke, is used directly in the request path without proper validation or URL encoding. This flaw can enable a malicious spoke to redirect authenticated requests to unintended API endpoints, potentially causing information disclosure or unauthorized access. The issue is tracked as CVE-2026-71475 with a medium severity rating and a CVSS score of 5. A security update addressing this vulnerability is available in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes version 2.17.1.

Impact

A malicious managed cluster ('spoke') can exploit this vulnerability to redirect authenticated API requests to unintended endpoints by injecting unencoded data into the URL path. This may lead to information disclosure or unauthorized access within the Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes environment. The impact is limited to confidentiality loss without integrity or availability impact, as indicated by the CVSS vector.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (Path Traversal) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Patches and advisories

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2026, 14:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats