Envoy is a cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy. A security vulnerability in Envoy allows external clients to manipulate Envoy headers, potentially leading to unauthorized access or other malicious actions within the mesh. This issue arises due to Envoys default configuration of internal trust boundaries, which considers all RFC1918 private address ranges as internal. The default behavior for handling internal addresses in Envoy has been changed. Previously, RFC1918 IP addresses were automatically considered internal, even if the internal_address_config was empty. The default configuration of Envoy will continue to trust internal addresses while in this release and it will not trust them by default in next release. If you have tooling such as probes on your private network which need to be treated as trusted (e.g. changing arbitrary x-envoy headers) please explicitly include those addresses or CIDR ranges into internal_address_config
. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to bypass security controls, access sensitive data, or disrupt services within the mesh, like Istio. This issue has been addressed in versions 1.31.2, 1.30.6, 1.29.9, and 1.28.7. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
The system’s authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user’s data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
---|---|---|---|
Envoy | Envoyproxy | * | 1.28.7 (excluding) |
Envoy | Envoyproxy | 1.29.0 (including) | 1.29.9 (excluding) |
Envoy | Envoyproxy | 1.30.0 (including) | 1.30.6 (excluding) |
Envoy | Envoyproxy | 1.31.0 (including) | 1.31.2 (excluding) |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/grafana-rhel8:2.5.5-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/istio-cni-rhel8:2.5.5-4 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/istio-must-gather-rhel8:2.5.5-4 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel8:1.73.14-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8:1.73.15-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/pilot-rhel8:2.5.5-4 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/proxyv2-rhel8:2.5.5-6 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.5 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/ratelimit-rhel8:2.5.5-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/grafana-rhel8:2.6.2-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/istio-cni-rhel8:2.6.2-5 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/istio-must-gather-rhel8:2.6.2-4 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/istio-rhel8-operator:2.6.2-5 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel8:1.89.2-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8:1.89.4-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8-operator:1.89.6-1 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/pilot-rhel8:2.6.2-5 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/ratelimit-rhel8:2.6.2-3 | * |
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 9 | RedHat | openshift-service-mesh/proxyv2-rhel9:2.6.2-7 | * |
Retrieval of a user record occurs in the system based on some key value that is under user control. The key would typically identify a user-related record stored in the system and would be used to lookup that record for presentation to the user. It is likely that an attacker would have to be an authenticated user in the system. However, the authorization process would not properly check the data access operation to ensure that the authenticated user performing the operation has sufficient entitlements to perform the requested data access, hence bypassing any other authorization checks present in the system. For example, attackers can look at places where user specific data is retrieved (e.g. search screens) and determine whether the key for the item being looked up is controllable externally. The key may be a hidden field in the HTML form field, might be passed as a URL parameter or as an unencrypted cookie variable, then in each of these cases it will be possible to tamper with the key value. One manifestation of this weakness is when a system uses sequential or otherwise easily-guessable session IDs that would allow one user to easily switch to another user’s session and read/modify their data.