CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-24784

Improper Authorization

Published: Jan 30, 2025 | Modified: Jan 30, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

kubewarden-controller is a Kubernetes controller that allows you to dynamically register Kubewarden admission policies. The policy group feature, added to by the 1.17.0 release. By being namespaced, the AdmissionPolicyGroup has a well constrained impact on cluster resources. Hence, it’s considered safe to allow non-admin users to create and manage these resources in the namespaces they own. Kubewarden policies can be allowed to query the Kubernetes API at evaluation time; these types of policies are called “context aware“. Context aware policies can perform list and get operations against a Kubernetes cluster. The queries are done using the ServiceAccount of the Policy Server instance that hosts the policy. That means that access to the cluster is determined by the RBAC rules that apply to that ServiceAccount. The AdmissionPolicyGroup CRD allowed the deployment of context aware policies. This could allow an attacker to obtain information about resources that are out of their reach, by leveraging a higher access to the cluster granted to the ServiceAccount token used to run the policy. The impact of this vulnerability depends on the privileges that have been granted to the ServiceAccount used to run the Policy Server and assumes that users are using the recommended best practices of keeping the Policy Servers ServiceAccount least privileged. By default, the Kubewarden helm chart grants access to the following resources (cluster wide) only: Namespace, Pod, Deployment and Ingress. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.21.0.

Weakness

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

Extended Description

Assuming a user with a given identity, authorization is the process of determining whether that user can access a given resource, based on the user’s privileges and any permissions or other access-control specifications that apply to the resource. When access control checks are not applied consistently - or not at all - users are able to access data or perform actions that they should not be allowed to perform. This can lead to a wide range of problems, including information exposures, denial of service, and arbitrary code execution.

Potential Mitigations

  • Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
  • Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
  • For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page.
  • One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.

References