What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? A user granted READ permission on a single, exact key can use the Watch gRPC API with clientv3.WithFromKey() (an open-ended, "from this key to the end of the keyspace" watch) to receive watch events for every key lexicographically greater than or equal to their permitted key — not just the one key they were granted. This is an authorization bypass in …
What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? A network attacker who can reach an etcd TLS listener can open many TCP connections and never send a ClientHello. Each connection spawns a goroutine in the etcd server process that blocks indefinitely inside tls.Conn.Handshake(), and each is tracked in the pending map. Unbounded goroutine and map growth exhausts memory in the etcd process, causing loss of availability for the etcd …
What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? A vulnerability in etcd allows read access via PrevKv, or lease attachment in Put requests within transaction operations, to bypass RBAC authorization checks. An authenticated user without sufficient read or lease-related permissions may be able to access unauthorized data or attach leases by invoking transaction operations with these features enabled. Kubernetes does not rely on etcd’s built-in authentication and authorization. Instead, …
What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? An authenticated user with RBAC restricted permissions on key ranges can use nested transactions to bypass all key-level authorization. This allows any authenticated user with direct access to etcd to effectively ignore all key range restrictions, accessing the entire etcd data store. Kubernetes does not rely on etcd’s built-in authentication and authorization. Instead, the API server handles authentication and authorization itself, …
What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? Multiple vulnerabilities allow unauthorized users to bypass authentication or authorization checks and call certain etcd functions in clusters that expose the gRPC API to untrusted or partially trusted clients. In unpatched etcd clusters with etcd auth enabled, unauthorized users are able to: call MemberList and learn cluster topology, including member IDs and advertised endpoints call Alarm, which can be abused for …
Vulnerability type Cryptography Workarounds Refer to the gateway documentation. The vulnerability was spotted due to unclear documentation of how the gateway handles endpoints validation. Detail Secure endpoint validation is performed by the etcd gateway start command when the –discovery-srv flag is enabled. However, as currently implemented, it only validates TCP reachability, effectively allowing connections to an endpoint that doesn't accept TLS connections through the HTTPS URL. The auditors has noted …
Data Validation
Vulnerability type Logging Detail etcd users who have no password can authenticate only through a client certificate. When such users try to authenticate into etcd using the Authenticate endpoint, errors are logged with insufficient information regarding why the authentication failed, and may be misleading when auditing etcd logs. References Find out more on this vulnerability in the security audit report
Etcd v3.5.4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via function PageWriter.write in pagewriter.go
Authentication vulnerability found in Etcd-io v.3.4.10 allows remote attackers to escalate privileges via the debug function.
In etcd before versions 3.3.23 and 3.4.10, it is possible to have an entry index greater then the number of entries in the ReadAll method in wal/wal.go. This could cause issues when WAL entries are being read during consensus as an arbitrary etcd consensus participant could go down from a runtime panic when reading the entry.
The vulnerability was spotted due to unclear documentation of how the gateway handles endpoints validation. Detail The gateway only authenticates endpoints detected from DNS SRV records, and it only authenticates the detected endpoints once.
etcd versions 3.2.x before 3.2.26 and 3.3.x before 3.3.11 is vulnerable to an improper authentication issue when role-based access control (RBAC) is used and client-cert-auth is enabled. If an etcd client server TLS certificate contains a Common Name (CN) which matches a valid RBAC username, a remote attacker may authenticate as that user with any valid (trusted) client certificate in a REST API request to the gRPC-gateway.
A cross-site request forgery flaw was found in etcd 3.3.1 and earlier. An attacker can set up a website that tries to send a POST request to the etcd server and modify a key. Adding a key is done with PUT so it is theoretically safe (can't PUT from an HTML form or such) but POST allows creating in-order keys that an attacker can send.
A cross-site request forgery flaw was found in etcd 3.3.1 and earlier. An attacker can set up a website that tries to send a POST request to the etcd server and modify a key. Adding a key is done with PUT so it is theoretically safe (can't PUT from an HTML form or such) but POST allows creating in-order keys that an attacker can send.