Skip to content

CoreDNS has TSIG authentication bypass on gRPC and QUIC transports

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 25, 2026 in coredns/coredns • Updated Apr 28, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/coredns/coredns (Go)

Affected versions

< 1.14.3

Patched versions

1.14.3

Description

Summary

The gRPC, QUIC, DoH, and DoH3 transports in CoreDNS incorrectly handle TSIG authentication.

For gRPC and QUIC, CoreDNS checks whether the TSIG key name exists in the config, but does not actually verify the TSIG HMAC. If the key name matches, tsigStatus remains nil and the tsig plugin treats the request as "verified".

For DoH and DoH3, the issue is worse: TSIG is not verified at all. The DoH response writer has TsigStatus() hardcoded to return nil, so any request containing a TSIG record is treated as authenticated, even if the key name is invalid and the MAC is garbage.

As a result, attackers may bypass TSIG authentication on affected transports and access TSIG-protected functionality such as AXFR/IXFR zone transfers, dynamic updates, or other TSIG-gated plugin behavior.

Details

In server_grpc.go and server_quic.go, the TSIG handling checks whether the TSIG key name exists, but does not call dns.TsigVerify().

Relevant code before fix:

if tsig := msg.IsTsig(); tsig != nil {
    if s.tsigSecret == nil {
        w.tsigStatus = dns.ErrSecret
    } else if _, ok := s.tsigSecret[tsig.Hdr.Name]; !ok {
        w.tsigStatus = dns.ErrSecret
    }
    // key found -> nothing happens -> tsigStatus stays nil -> "verified"
}

This means that for gRPC and QUIC, a request with a known TSIG key name but an invalid MAC is accepted as authenticated.

PRs #7943 and #7947 partially addressed this area by adding key name checks for gRPC and QUIC, but did not add HMAC verification.

The DoH and DoH3 paths have an even weaker failure mode. In https.go, DoHWriter.TsigStatus() returned nil unconditionally:

func (d *DoHWriter) TsigStatus() error {
    return nil
}

In server_https.go, the incoming DNS message is unpacked from the HTTP request and passed directly into ServeDNS() without checking msg.IsTsig(), without looking up the TSIG key name, and without calling dns.TsigVerify().

The same pattern exists in the DoH3 path in server_https3.go.

The effective DoH/DoH3 flow before the fix was:

  1. HTTP or HTTP/3 request arrives.
  2. DNS message is unpacked from the request.
  3. A DoHWriter is created.
  4. The message is passed to ServeDNS().
  5. The tsig plugin checks w.TsigStatus().
  6. TsigStatus() returns nil.
  7. nil is interpreted as successful TSIG verification.

This means that for DoH and DoH3, CoreDNS did not even require a valid TSIG key name. Any TSIG record was enough to satisfy the tsig plugin, regardless of key name or MAC contents.

PoC

Setup: built CoreDNS from master at commit 12d9457 and also verified against the v1.14.2 release binary. Configured a single test zone with 9 records and tsig { require all }.

Listeners used the same TSIG configuration and key:

  • TCP on port 1053, using the normal dns.Server path where TSIG HMAC verification works correctly
  • gRPC on port 1443, using manual TSIG handling
  • DoH on port 8443
  • DoH3 with the same TSIG configuration

gRPC / QUIC behavior

A test client sent AXFR requests over gRPC with a valid TSIG key name but forged MAC values. The same requests were sent over TCP for comparison.

MAC used gRPC TCP
32 zero bytes BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
32 random bytes BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
HMAC computed with wrong secret BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
truncated to 16 bytes BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
single byte 0x41 BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
empty MAC BYPASS, 9 records returned BADSIG
wrong key name + zero MAC REJECTED, NOTAUTH/BADKEY REJECTED, NOTAUTH/BADKEY

6 out of 7 forged TSIG requests bypassed authentication over gRPC and returned a full zone transfer. The only rejected case was the wrong key name, because the gRPC path checked whether the key name existed.

The same class applied to QUIC.

DoH / DoH3 behavior

For DoH, a test client sent DNS queries over HTTPS POST to /dns-query with forged TSIG records. These requests were also compared against TCP.

TSIG variant DoH result TCP result
32 zero bytes BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
32 random bytes BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
HMAC computed with wrong secret BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
truncated to 16 bytes BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
single byte 0x41 BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
empty MAC BYPASS, NOERROR BADSIG
bad key name BYPASS, NOERROR NOTAUTH/BADKEY
no TSIG record REJECTED, REFUSED REJECTED, REFUSED

7 out of 8 cases bypassed authentication over DoH. Every request containing a TSIG record was accepted, including requests with an invalid key name.

An AXFR request over DoH with a forged TSIG record using a zero-byte MAC returned the full test zone.

The same pattern applies to DoH3 because it used the same DoHWriter TSIG behavior and did not verify TSIG before passing the message into the plugin chain.

To confirm that the tsig plugin itself was enforcing policy, requests with no TSIG record were rejected with REFUSED. The bypass happens because the transport layer reports successful TSIG verification when verification either did not happen or only checked the key name.

Impact

An unauthenticated network attacker may bypass TSIG authentication on affected CoreDNS transports.

Depending on configuration, this may allow an attacker to:

  • perform AXFR or IXFR zone transfers over affected transports
  • dump TSIG-protected zone data
  • submit dynamic DNS updates if enabled
  • bypass other TSIG-gated plugin behavior
  • authenticate over DoH or DoH3 without knowing a valid TSIG key name

The DoH and DoH3 variants have a lower exploitation bar than gRPC and QUIC because the attacker does not need to know a configured TSIG key name. Any TSIG record is treated as valid.

Affected transports

  • gRPC
  • QUIC
  • DoH
  • DoH3

Workarounds

If upgrading is not immediately possible:

  • Disable gRPC, QUIC, DoH, and DoH3 listeners where TSIG authentication is required.
  • Restrict network-level access to affected transport ports to trusted sources only.
  • Avoid exposing TSIG-protected functionality such as AXFR, IXFR, or dynamic updates over affected transports.

Fix

Affected transports must verify TSIG before passing the DNS message into the plugin chain.

For requests containing a TSIG record, the transport should:

  1. check whether TSIG secrets are configured
  2. verify that the TSIG key name exists
  3. call dns.TsigVerify() against the original wire-format message
  4. store the resulting status in the response writer
  5. return that status from TsigStatus()

A successful key name lookup alone is not sufficient. A nil TSIG status must only be returned after successful HMAC verification.

References

@yongtang yongtang published to coredns/coredns Apr 25, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 28, 2026
Reviewed Apr 28, 2026
Last updated Apr 28, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Improper Authentication

When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-35579

GHSA ID

GHSA-vp29-5652-4fw9

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.