CVE-2023-28114
Cilium-Cli ≤ 0.13.2
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2023-28114 is a medium-severity Improper Handling of Insufficient Permissions or Privileges (CWE-280) vulnerability in Cilium Cilium-Cli. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 9th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-0902
Vulnerability Data
`cilium-cli` is the command line interface to install, manage, and troubleshoot Kubernetes clusters running Cilium. Prior to version 0.13.2,`cilium-cli`, when used to configure cluster mesh functionality, can remove the enforcement of user permissions on the `etcd` store used to mirror…
more
local cluster information to remote clusters. Users who have set up cluster meshes using the Cilium Helm chart are not affected by this issue. Due to an incorrect mount point specification, the settings specified by the `initContainer` that configures `etcd` users and their permissions are overwritten when using `cilium-cli` to configure a cluster mesh. An attacker who has already gained access to a valid key and certificate for an `etcd` cluster compromised in this manner could then modify state in that `etcd` cluster. This issue is patched in `cilium-cli` 0.13.2. As a workaround, one may use Cilium's Helm charts to create their cluster.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V6.2.2V8.3.3
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Provides defined handling (alert and additional actions) for the exceptional condition of audit logging failure.
Supplies a concrete handling action (safe mode) for exceptional conditions, mitigating risks from improper or absent handling that could allow continued attacks.
By preparing users for contingency scenarios, the control promotes proper handling of exceptional conditions instead of default or unsafe behaviors.
An updated contingency plan defines current actions for exceptional conditions, reducing the window for attackers to exploit improper handling leading to system failure.
Procedures ensure proper handling of exceptional conditions to support effective incident response.
Incident response testing confirms proper handling of exceptional conditions to limit exploit impact.
Gives users guidance on incident handling, reducing improper handling of exceptional conditions that could stem from exploited weaknesses.
Enforces structured response to exceptional conditions so the system cannot remain in an unsafe state.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Defining, enforcing and reviewing access permissions with least privilege directly prevents code paths that mishandle insufficient privileges.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
Runtime monitoring of software and data surfaces adverse events triggered by unhandled permission failures.
Generating logs of permission-related events enables detection and analysis of improper handling.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect missing or incorrect privilege handling.
Defines access-control policy that should prevent insufficient-privilege situations.
Specifies how access rights are granted, reviewed and revoked, directly addressing privilege handling.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248548 OL 8 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
- V-248596 OL 8 must enable the SELinux targeted policy. prevents CWE-280
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
- V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
- V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-280