CVE-2026-6540: Tigera Calico · Path Traversal
Affects Tigera CalicoSource CVE Database V5
Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.9 High : upgrade to 3.31.6 soon.
Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 07:15 UTC
- EPSS
- 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 45% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
- Patch
- Available – fixed in 3.31.6, 3.22.4, 3.21.7 +1
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:LExploitation evidence
Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Jul 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 29 Oct 2026.
What to do
Upgrade Calico to 3.31.6; Calico Enterprise to 3.22.4 or 3.21.7; Calico Cloud to 22.4.0.
Affected software
| Product | Affected | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| TigeraCalico | Affected
| Fixed in
|
| TigeraCalico Enterprise | Affected
| Fixed in
|
| TigeraCalico Enterprise | Affected
| Fixed in
|
| TigeraCalico Cloud | Affected
| Fixed in
|
AI-suggested
Since the Application Layer Policy is disabled by default, disabling it or ensuring it remains disabled can mitigate risk.
Description
Calico's Application Layer Policy (disabled by default), which enforces HTTP rules through Dikastes, fails to perform URL path normalization. As a result, HTTP requests using path-traversal segments, encoded slashes, or repeated slashes are not correctly evaluated by Prefix path rules. Dikastes authorizes the request under the permitted prefix while the downstream workload or a fronting proxy normalizes the path and serves the restricted endpoint. An attacker with network access and no special RBAC can potentially reach HTTP endpoints the policy was intended to restrict.