CVE-2024-28250 (GCVE-0-2024-28250)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2024-03-18 21:42
Modified
2024-08-02 00:48
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
- CWE-311 - Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data
Summary
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.
References
Impacted products
{ "containers": { "adp": [ { "metrics": [ { "other": { "content": { "id": "CVE-2024-28250", "options": [ { "Exploitation": "none" }, { "Automatable": "no" }, { "Technical Impact": "partial" } ], "role": "CISA Coordinator", "timestamp": "2024-03-19T14:36:42.524251Z", "version": "2.0.3" }, "type": "ssvc" } } ], "providerMetadata": { "dateUpdated": "2024-06-04T18:03:15.198Z", "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0", "shortName": "CISA-ADP" }, "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment" }, { "providerMetadata": { "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T00:48:49.605Z", "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108", "shortName": "CVE" }, "references": [ { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6", "tags": [ "x_refsource_CONFIRM", "x_transferred" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC", "x_transferred" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC", "x_transferred" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC", "x_transferred" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2" } ], "title": "CVE Program Container" } ], "cna": { "affected": [ { "product": "cilium", "vendor": "cilium", "versions": [ { "status": "affected", "version": "\u003e= 1.14.0, \u003c 1.14.8" }, { "status": "affected", "version": "\u003e= 1.15.0, \u003c 1.15.2" } ] } ], "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." } ], "metrics": [ { "cvssV3_1": { "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" } } ], "problemTypes": [ { "descriptions": [ { "cweId": "CWE-311", "description": "CWE-311: Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data", "lang": "en", "type": "CWE" } ] } ], "providerMetadata": { "dateUpdated": "2024-03-18T21:42:21.689Z", "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa", "shortName": "GitHub_M" }, "references": [ { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6", "tags": [ "x_refsource_CONFIRM" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8" }, { "name": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2", "tags": [ "x_refsource_MISC" ], "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2" } ], "source": { "advisory": "GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6", "discovery": "UNKNOWN" }, "title": "Cilium has possible unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies" } }, "cveMetadata": { "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa", "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M", "cveId": "CVE-2024-28250", "datePublished": "2024-03-18T21:42:21.689Z", "dateReserved": "2024-03-07T14:33:30.036Z", "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T00:48:49.605Z", "state": "PUBLISHED" }, "dataType": "CVE_RECORD", "dataVersion": "5.1", "vulnerability-lookup:meta": { "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2024-28250\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2024-03-18T22:15:08.750\",\"lastModified\":\"2025-01-09T16:47:40.047\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"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.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":6.1,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"ADJACENT_NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"CHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":1.6,\"impactScore\":4.0},{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":6.1,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"ADJACENT_NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"CHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":1.6,\"impactScore\":4.0}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-311\"}]},{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-319\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:cilium:cilium:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\",\"versionStartIncluding\":\"1.14.0\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"1.14.8\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"50C01BB2-3804-450F-846D-DE7A23112DF6\"},{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:cilium:cilium:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\",\"versionStartIncluding\":\"1.15.0\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"1.15.2\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"9938037D-85A4-4964-B593-33015AEFC8DB\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Vendor Advisory\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13\",\"source\":\"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8\",\"source\":\"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2\",\"source\":\"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108\",\"tags\":[\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6\",\"source\":\"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108\",\"tags\":[\"Vendor Advisory\"]}]}}", "vulnrichment": { "containers": "{\"cna\": {\"title\": \"Cilium has possible unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies\", \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"cweId\": \"CWE-311\", \"lang\": \"en\", \"description\": \"CWE-311: Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data\", \"type\": \"CWE\"}]}], \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"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\"}}], \"references\": [{\"name\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"], \"url\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6\"}, {\"name\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"], \"url\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13\"}, {\"name\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"], \"url\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8\"}, {\"name\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"], \"url\": \"https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2\"}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"cilium\", \"product\": \"cilium\", \"versions\": [{\"version\": \"\u003e= 1.14.0, \u003c 1.14.8\", \"status\": \"affected\"}, {\"version\": \"\u003e= 1.15.0, \u003c 1.15.2\", \"status\": \"affected\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2024-03-18T21:42:21.689Z\"}, \"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.\"}], \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}}, \"adp\": [{\"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2024-28250\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2024-03-19T14:36:42.524251Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2024-05-23T19:01:18.634Z\"}, \"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\"}]}", "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2024-28250\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateReserved\": \"2024-03-07T14:33:30.036Z\", \"datePublished\": \"2024-03-18T21:42:21.689Z\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2024-06-04T18:03:15.198Z\"}", "dataType": "CVE_RECORD", "dataVersion": "5.1" } } }
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.
Loading…
Loading…