GSD-2024-28250
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2024-03-08 06:02Details
Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Starting in version 1.14.0 and prior to versions 1.14.8 and 1.15.2, In Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node's Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted and Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node's DNS proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted. This issue has been resolved in Cilium 1.14.8 and 1.15.2 in in native routing mode (`routingMode=native`) and in Cilium 1.14.4 in tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`). Not that in tunneling mode, `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` must be set to `true`. There is no known workaround for this issue.
Aliases
{
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-28250"
],
"details": "Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Starting in version 1.14.0 and prior to versions 1.14.8 and 1.15.2, In Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted and Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s DNS proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted. This issue has been resolved in Cilium 1.14.8 and 1.15.2 in in native routing mode (`routingMode=native`) and in Cilium 1.14.4 in tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`). Not that in tunneling mode, `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` must be set to `true`. There is no known workaround for this issue.",
"id": "GSD-2024-28250",
"modified": "2024-03-08T06:02:46.494848Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
"ID": "CVE-2024-28250",
"STATE": "PUBLIC"
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "cilium",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 1.14.0, \u003c 1.14.8"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 1.15.0, \u003c 1.15.2"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "cilium"
}
]
}
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Starting in version 1.14.0 and prior to versions 1.14.8 and 1.15.2, In Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted and Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s DNS proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted. This issue has been resolved in Cilium 1.14.8 and 1.15.2 in in native routing mode (`routingMode=native`) and in Cilium 1.14.4 in tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`). Not that in tunneling mode, `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` must be set to `true`. There is no known workaround for this issue."
}
]
},
"impact": {
"cvss": [
{
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "ADJACENT_NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 6.1,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-311",
"lang": "eng",
"value": "CWE-311: Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2"
}
]
},
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
}
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"cve": {
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Starting in version 1.14.0 and prior to versions 1.14.8 and 1.15.2, In Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted and Wireguard-eligible traffic that is sent between a node\u0027s DNS proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted. This issue has been resolved in Cilium 1.14.8 and 1.15.2 in in native routing mode (`routingMode=native`) and in Cilium 1.14.4 in tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`). Not that in tunneling mode, `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` must be set to `true`. There is no known workaround for this issue."
},
{
"lang": "es",
"value": "Cilium es una soluci\u00f3n de redes, observabilidad y seguridad con un plano de datos basado en eBPF. A partir de la versi\u00f3n 1.14.0 y anteriores a las versiones 1.14.8 y 1.15.2, en los cl\u00fasteres de Cilium con WireGuard habilitado y el tr\u00e1fico que coincide con las pol\u00edticas de Capa 7, el tr\u00e1fico elegible para Wireguard que se env\u00eda entre el proxy Envoy de un nodo y los pods de otros nodos se env\u00eda sin cifrar. y el tr\u00e1fico elegible para Wireguard que se env\u00eda entre el proxy DNS de un nodo y los pods de otros nodos se env\u00eda sin cifrar. Este problema se resolvi\u00f3 en Cilium 1.14.8 y 1.15.2 en modo de enrutamiento nativo (`routingMode=native`) y en Cilium 1.14.4 en modo de t\u00fanel (`routingMode=tunnel`). No es que en modo t\u00fanel, `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` deba establecerse en `true`. No se conoce ning\u00fan workaround para este problema."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2024-28250",
"lastModified": "2024-03-19T13:26:46.000",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "ADJACENT_NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 6.1,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.6,
"impactScore": 4.0,
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2024-03-18T22:15:08.750",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-311"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Loading…
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.
Loading…