ghsa-cp96-jpmq-xrr2
Vulnerability from github
Published
2023-03-16 16:04
Modified
2023-03-27 22:24
Summary
On a compromised node, the virt-handler service account can be used to modify all node specs
Details

Impact

If a malicious user has taken over a Kubernetes node where virt-handler (the KubeVirt node-daemon) is running, the virt-handler service account can be used to modify all node specs.

This can be misused to lure-in system-level-privileged components (which can for instance read all secrets on the cluster, or can exec into pods on other nodes). This way a compromised node can be used to elevate privileges beyond the node until potentially having full privileged access to the whole cluster.

The simplest way to exploit this, once a user could compromise a specific node, is to set with the virt-handler service account all other nodes to unschedulable and simply wait until system-critical components with high privileges appear on its node.

Since this requires a node to be compromised first, the severity of this finding is considered Medium.

Patches

Not yet available.

Workarounds

Gatekeeper users can add a webhook which will block the virt-handler service account to modify the spec of a node.

An example policy, preventing virt-handler from changing the node spec may look like this:

```yaml apiVersion: templates.gatekeeper.sh/v1 kind: ConstraintTemplate metadata: name: virthandlerrestrictions spec: [...] targets: - libs: - |
[...]
is_virt_handler(username) { username == "system:serviceaccount:kubevirt:virt-handler" } mutates_node_in_unintended_way { # TODO # only allow kubevirt.io/ prefixed metadata node changes } rego: | [...]

    violation[{"msg": msg}] {
      is_virt_handler(username)
      mutates_node_in_unintended_way(input.review.object, input.review.oldObject)
      msg := sprintf("virt-handler tries to modify node <%v> in an unintended way.", [input.review.object.name])
    }

```

and applying this template to node modifications.

Credits

Special thanks to the discoverers of this issue:

Nanzi Yang (nzyang@stu.xidian.edu.cn) Xin Guo (guox@stu.xidian.edu.cn) Jietao Xiao (jietaoXiao@stu.xidian.edu.cn) Wenbo Shen (shenwenbo@zju.edu.cn) Jinku Li (jkli@xidian.edu.cn)

References

https://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt/issues/9109

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "kubevirt.io/kubevirt"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "0.59.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-26484"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2023-03-16T16:04:42Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-03-15T21:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nIf a malicious user has taken over a Kubernetes node where virt-handler (the KubeVirt node-daemon) is running, the virt-handler service account can be used to modify all node specs.\n\nThis can be misused to lure-in system-level-privileged components (which can for instance read all secrets on the cluster, or can exec into pods on other nodes). This way a compromised node can be used to elevate privileges beyond the node until potentially having full privileged access to the whole cluster.\n\nThe simplest way to exploit this, once a user could compromise a specific node, is to set with the virt-handler service account all other nodes to unschedulable and simply wait until system-critical components with high privileges appear on its node.\n\nSince this requires a node to be compromised first, the severity of this finding is considered Medium.\n\n### Patches\n\nNot yet available.\n\n### Workarounds\nGatekeeper users can add a webhook which will block the `virt-handler` service account to modify the spec of a node.\n\nAn example policy, preventing virt-handler from changing the node spec may look like this:\n\n```yaml\napiVersion: templates.gatekeeper.sh/v1\nkind: ConstraintTemplate\nmetadata:\n  name: virthandlerrestrictions\nspec:\n[...]\n  targets:\n    - libs:\n        - |         \n[...]          \n          is_virt_handler(username) {\n              username == \"system:serviceaccount:kubevirt:virt-handler\"\n          }\n          mutates_node_in_unintended_way {\n            # TODO\n            # only allow kubevirt.io/ prefixed metadata node changes\n          }\n      rego: |\n[...]\n        \n        violation[{\"msg\": msg}] {\n          is_virt_handler(username)\n          mutates_node_in_unintended_way(input.review.object, input.review.oldObject)\n          msg := sprintf(\"virt-handler tries to modify node \u003c%v\u003e in an unintended way.\", [input.review.object.name])\n        }\n```\n\nand applying this template to node modifications.\n\n\n### Credits\n\nSpecial thanks to the discoverers of this issue:\n\nNanzi Yang (nzyang@stu.xidian.edu.cn)\nXin Guo (guox@stu.xidian.edu.cn)\nJietao Xiao (jietaoXiao@stu.xidian.edu.cn)\nWenbo Shen (shenwenbo@zju.edu.cn)\nJinku Li (jkli@xidian.edu.cn)\n\n### References\n\nhttps://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt/issues/9109",
  "id": "GHSA-cp96-jpmq-xrr2",
  "modified": "2023-03-27T22:24:34Z",
  "published": "2023-03-16T16:04:42Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt/security/advisories/GHSA-cp96-jpmq-xrr2"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-26484"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt/issues/9109"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "On a compromised node, the virt-handler service account can be used to modify all node specs"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.