CVE-2026-14257VulnerabilityPublished 25 Aug 2026Updated 26 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Kiali 2.11.16 for Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.1

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-14257· High 7.5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 23 Jul 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 26 Oct 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
juliangruberbrace-expansion	Affected <=5.0.7	Fixed in–
npmbrace-expansion`pkg:npm/brace-expansion`Other threats	Affected <=5.0.7	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

Kiali 2.11.16, for Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.1, provides observability for the service mesh by offering a visual representation of the mesh topology and metrics, helping users monitor, trace, and manage efficiently. Security Fix(es): * CVE-2026-45623 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: PostCSS: Information disclosure and denial of service via crafted CSS input (OSSM-15106) * CVE-2026-45623 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: PostCSS: Information disclosure and denial of service via crafted CSS input (OSSM-15111) * CVE-2026-54272 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: ip-address: Server-Side Request Forgery via IPv4-mapped/NAT64 IPv6 address misclassification (OSSM-15118) * CVE-2026-54272 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: ip-address: Server-Side Request Forgery via IPv4-mapped/NAT64 IPv6 address misclassification (OSSM-15119) * CVE-2026-69153 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: PostCSS: Information disclosure via crafted sourceMappingURL (OSSM-15156) * CVE-2026-69153 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: PostCSS: Information disclosure via crafted sourceMappingURL (OSSM-15162) * CVE-2026-69152 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: brace-expansion: Denial of Service via unbounded intermediate arrays (OSSM-15171) * CVE-2026-69152 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: brace-expansion: Denial of Service via unbounded intermediate arrays (OSSM-15172) * CVE-2026-69192 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: ip-address: Inconsistent IP address parsing leads to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) and trust-boundary bypass (OSSM-15182) * CVE-2026-69192 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: ip-address: Inconsistent IP address parsing leads to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) and trust-boundary bypass (OSSM-15183) * CVE-2026-14257 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: Brace-expansion: Denial of Service via memory exhaustion in expand() function (OSSM-15193) * CVE-2026-14257 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: Brace-expansion: Denial of Service via memory exhaustion in expand() function (OSSM-15223) * CVE-2026-45149 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: brace-expansion: Denial of Service due to excessive memory allocation when expanding large numeric ranges (OSSM-15261) * CVE-2026-45149 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: brace-expansion: Denial of Service due to excessive memory allocation when expanding large numeric ranges (OSSM-15266) * CVE-2026-73088 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: Browserslist: Prototype pollution leading to denial of service (OSSM-15288) * CVE-2026-73088 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: Browserslist: Prototype pollution leading to denial of service (OSSM-15289) * CVE-2026-73089 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: Browserslist: Denial of Service via unbounded memory growth from distinct query results (OSSM-15307) * CVE-2026-73089 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: Browserslist: Denial of Service via unbounded memory growth from distinct query results (OSSM-15308) * CVE-2026-67313 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: axios: Denial of Service via uncontrolled recursion in formDataToJSON (OSSM-15475) * CVE-2026-67313 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: axios: Denial of Service via uncontrolled recursion in formDataToJSON (OSSM-15477) * CVE-2026-67320 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9: axios: Information disclosure via Prototype Pollution in Node HTTP adapter (OSSM-15486) * CVE-2026-67320 openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9: axios: Information disclosure via Prototype Pollution in Node HTTP adapter (OSSM-15487) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

CWE-770Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #25
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
Requirements
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Architecture and Design
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V11.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Exponential Data Expansion (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data Parameter Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data with Nested Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Oversized Serialized Data Payloads (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
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).
CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-915Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified.
Implementation
If available, use features of the language or framework that allow specification of allowlists of attributes or fields that are allowed to be modified. If possible, prefer allowlists over denylists.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation · Input Validation
For any externally-influenced input, check the input against an allowlist of internal object attributes or fields that are allowed to be modified.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
Infrastructure as Code (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1389Incorrect Parsing of Numbers with Different Radices (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product parses numeric input assuming base 10 (decimal) values, but it does not account for inputs that use a different base number (radix).
Implementation · Enforcement by Conversion
If only decimal-based values are expected in the application, conditional checks should be created in a way that prevent octal or hexadecimal strings from being checked.
Implementation · Input Validation
If various numerical bases do need to be supported, check for leading values indicating the non-decimal base you wish to support (such as 0x for hex) and convert the numeric strings to integers of the respective base. Reject any other alternative-base string that is not intentionally supported by the application.
Implementation · Input Validation
If regular expressions are used to validate IP addresses, ensure that they are bounded using ^ and $ to prevent base-prepended IP addresses from being matched.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-770, CWE-22, CWE-918 +2

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats