CVE-2021-25736GO-2023-2159GHSA-35C7-W35F-XWGH
Windows kube-proxy LoadBalancer contention
- Published
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- Fix
- Fixed in 1.21.0
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
CISA's decision points: whether it is exploited, whether attacks can be automated, and how much control an attacker gets. Assessed (SSVC 2.0.3).What do these mean? →
- Exploitation: none
- Automatable: no
- Technical impact: partial
Summary
Kube-proxy on Windows can unintentionally forward traffic to local processes listening on the same port (“spec.ports[*].port”) as a LoadBalancer Service when the LoadBalancer controller does not set the “status.loadBalancer.ingress[].ip” field. Clusters where the LoadBalancer controller sets the “status.loadBalancer.ingress[].ip” field are unaffected.
Timeline
- CVE published
- CISA SSVC assessment
Exploitation: none · Automatable: no · Technical impact: partial
- Record last updated
Affected versions
- Kubernetes Kubernetes
through v1.20.5
- k8s.io/kubernetesGo
fixed in 1.21.0