CVE-2026-91163warp-tech warpgate error message exposure
CVE-2026-91163 is a error message exposure in warp-tech warpgate, rated low (3.7 on CVSS 3.1).
Why this priority: Low severity, with no exploitation signal.
Published · Updated · NVD status: Deferred
What it is
Error messages reveal internal details useful to an attacker. Secrets or personal data are written to log files.
How it is reached
An attacker can exploit it over the network, without an account, and nobody has to click anything. Success also depends on conditions the attacker does not fully control.
What an attacker gains
The direct impact is limited: partial access to data or a partial outage. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker learn data or internals that help a follow-up attack.
Is it being exploited?
CISA's SSVC assessment notes a public proof of concept. EPSS estimates a 0.17% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, higher than 7% of scored CVEs.
What to do
- Upgrade warp-tech warpgate to 0.29.0 or later.
- Until it is patched, keep it off the internet or behind a VPN, allowlist or authenticating proxy.
Description from NVD
Warpgate is an open source SSH, HTTPS, and MySQL bastion host for Linux. Prior to 0.29.0, the Kubernetes protocol listener uses AcceptAnyClientCert in warpgate-protocol-kubernetes/src/server/client_certs.rs to accept certificates at the TLS layer and defer validation to warpgate-protocol-kubernetes/src/server/auth.rs, where authentication and lookup failures are rendered verbatim in an HTTP 500 response body. The Kubernetes application in warpgate-protocol-kubernetes/src/server/mod.rs lacks the outer request-logging wrapper used by the HTTP protocol, and failures in warpgate-protocol-kubernetes/src/server/handlers.rs can short-circuit before its inner log point. An unauthenticated network client can therefore induce failures and receive ASN.1/DER parser diagnostics or sea_orm database errors without the attempt being recorded in the gateway log. The disclosed information is limited to internal diagnostics, and no user-data, integrity, or availability impact is established. This issue is fixed in version 0.29.0.
What this means for your architecture.
A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.
Components it touches
- Error responses, logs and debug endpoints. The flaw sits between internal data and whoever can read the response or log.
- APIs that over-share. The flaw sits between internal data and whoever can read the response or log.
Trust boundaries in play
- Internet-facing entry points. No account is needed. Any instance reachable from outside your perimeter, through a load balancer, gateway, VPN or exposed admin port, is in scope.
- Between internal data and whoever can read the response or log. An attacker who crosses it can learn data or internals that help a follow-up attack.
Questions to answer about your own systems
- Where does warp-tech warpgate run in your systems, and at which version?
- Which of those instances can be reached from the internet or partner networks?
- What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?
Sources
- CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
- Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
- Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
- Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.