ghsa-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-03-18 20:33
Modified
2024-03-19 18:31
Severity ?
6.1 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Summary
Unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies
Details

Impact

In Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies:

  • Traffic that should be WireGuard-encrypted is sent unencrypted between a node's Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes.
  • Traffic that should be WireGuard-encrypted is sent unencrypted between a node's DNS proxy and pods on other nodes.

Patches

This issue affects:

  • In native routing mode (routingMode=native):
  • Cilium v1.14 versions before v1.14.8
  • Cilium v1.15 versions before v1.15.2
  • In tunneling mode (routingMode=tunnel):
  • Cilium v1.14 versions before v1.14.4
  • Cilium v1.14.4 if encryption.wireguard.encapsulate is set to false (default).

This issue has been resolved in:

  • In native routing mode (routingMode=native):
  • Cilium v1.14.8
  • Cilium v1.15.2
  • In tunneling mode (routingMode=tunnel):
  • Cilium v1.14.4. NOTE encryption.wireguard.encapsulate must be set to true.

Workarounds

There is no workaround to this issue.

Acknowledgements

The Cilium community has worked together with members of Isovalent to prepare these mitigations. Special thanks to @brb, @giorio94, @gandro and @jschwinger233 for their work on triaging and remediating this issue.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please reach out on Slack.

If you think you found a related vulnerability, we strongly encourage you to report security vulnerabilities to our private security mailing list at security@cilium.io. This is a private mailing list where only members of the Cilium internal security team are subscribed to, and your report will be treated as top priority.

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/cilium/cilium"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.14.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.14.8"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/cilium/cilium"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.15.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.15.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-28250"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-311",
      "CWE-319"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-03-18T20:33:32Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-03-18T22:15:08Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nIn Cilium clusters with WireGuard enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies:\n\n- Traffic that should be WireGuard-encrypted is sent unencrypted between a node\u0027s Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes.\n- Traffic that should be WireGuard-encrypted is sent unencrypted between a node\u0027s DNS proxy and pods on other nodes.\n\n### Patches\n\nThis issue affects:\n\n* In native routing mode (`routingMode=native`):\n  * Cilium v1.14 versions before v1.14.8\n  * Cilium v1.15 versions before v1.15.2\n* In tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`):\n  * Cilium v1.14 versions before v1.14.4\n  * Cilium v1.14.4 if `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` is set to `false` (default).\n\nThis issue has been resolved in:\n\n* In native routing mode (`routingMode=native`):\n  * Cilium v1.14.8\n  * Cilium v1.15.2\n* In tunneling mode (`routingMode=tunnel`):\n  * Cilium v1.14.4. **NOTE** `encryption.wireguard.encapsulate` must be set to `true`.\n   \n### Workarounds\n\nThere is no workaround to this issue.\n\n### Acknowledgements\nThe Cilium community has worked together with members of Isovalent to prepare these mitigations. Special thanks to @brb, @giorio94, @gandro and @jschwinger233 for their work on triaging and remediating this issue.\n\n### For more information\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please reach out on [Slack](https://docs.cilium.io/en/latest/community/community/#slack).\n\nIf you think you found a related vulnerability, we strongly encourage you to report security vulnerabilities to our private security mailing list at [security@cilium.io](mailto:security@cilium.io). This is a private mailing list where only members of the Cilium internal security team are subscribed to, and your report will be treated as top priority.\n",
  "id": "GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6",
  "modified": "2024-03-19T18:31:16Z",
  "published": "2024-03-18T20:33:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-v6q2-4qr3-5cw6"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-28250"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.13.13"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.14.8"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/releases/tag/v1.15.2"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




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.