CVE-2020-8554
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
A flaw was found in kubernetes. If a potential attacker can already create or edit services and pods, then they may be able to intercept traffic from other pods (or nodes) in the cluster.
Statement
OpenShift Container Platform (OCP) includes a builtin externalIP admission plugin, which restricts the use of Service eternalIPs to those configured by a cluster-admin. In OCP4 all externalIP ranges are disabled by default. In OCP 3.11, the default range is "0.0.0.0/0", which allows all IP addresses.
The second attack vector, via patching the Status of a LoadBalancer Service, is not possible unless permission to patch service/status is granted. OCP does not grant this permission to users who are not cluster-admins.
OCP 4 is not affected by this vulnerability as it is secure by default. OCP 3.11 is affected, however the vulnerability can be by mitigated by configuring the builtin externalIP admission plugin.
Mitigation
ExternalIP addresses ranges can be configured as described below. OCP 4 is secure by default, though cluster-admins can whitelist externalIP addresses as needed. OCP 3.11 can be secured by changing `externalIPNetworkCIDR` to "0.0.0.0/32", which blocks all externalIP address values.
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.6/networking/configuring_ingress_cluster_traffic/configuring-externalip.html
This page is not included, but the link has been rewritten to point to the nearest parent document.https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/3.11/admin_guide/tcp_ingress_external_ports.html#service-externalip
Users can check if they have permission to patch the Status of a LoadBalancer Service with the command: `kubectl auth can-i patch service --subresource=status`. In OCP, by default only cluster-admins are granted this permission.
Additional Information
- This content is not included.Bugzilla 1891051: kubernetes: MITM using LoadBalancer or ExternalIPs
- Content from cwe.mitre.org is not included.CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2020-8554
- Offline Security Data data is available for integration with other systems. See Offline Security Data API to get started.
External References
Content from www.cve.org is not included.https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-8554
Content from nvd.nist.gov is not included.https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-8554
Affected Packages and Issued Red Hat Security Errata
| Products / Services | Components | State | Errata |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 3.11 | atomic-openshift | Fixed | RHSA-2021:0079 |
| Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 | openshift | Not affected | |
| Red Hat Storage 3 | heketi | Not affected |
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authorities (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications ).
| CVSS v3 Score Breakdown | Red Hat | NVD |
|---|---|---|
| CVSS v3 Base Score | 6.3 | 5 |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network |
| Attack Complexity | Low | High |
| Privileges Required | Low | Low |
| User Interaction | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality Impact | Low | Low |
| Integrity Impact | Low | Low |
| Availability Impact | Low | Low |
CVSS v3 Vector
Red Hat CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
NVD CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Red Hat CVSS v3 Score Explanation
Proposed changes to NIST's current CVSSv3 scoring: AC:H -> AC:L C:H -> C:L I:H -> I:L A:H -> A:L
To successfully exploit this vulnerability a potential attacker needs access to create or edit services and pods and then they may be able to intercept traffic from other pods or even cluster nodes. Hence proposing a change to Attack Complexity (AC) from High to Low. Access to some restricted information can be obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained. The same situation is in regards to the possible data modification, the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification. The attacker also does not have the ability to completely deny service. The Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability (CIA) metrics should be changed from High to Low.
Acknowledgements
Red Hat would like to thank the Kubernetes Product Security Committee for reporting this issue. Upstream acknowledges Etienne Champetier (Anevia) as the original reporter.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?
For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.
My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
- "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
- "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
- Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.
What is a mitigation?
I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?
Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.