Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-1974

Public PoCHigh EPSS
Published
25 March 2025
Modified
15 April 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.99 99.9th percentile
Risk Priority 97 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-1974 is a critical-severity Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization (CWE-653) vulnerability in Https: (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Escape to Host (T1611); ranked in the top 0.1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-2 (Separation of System and User Functionality) and SC-3 (Security Function Isolation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2025-1974 is a critical vulnerability in the ingress-nginx controller component of Kubernetes. Under certain conditions, it permits arbitrary code execution within the controller process, which by default has cluster-wide access to Secrets. The issue is tracked under CWE-653 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8.

An unauthenticated attacker who already has network access to the pod network can exploit the flaw to run code in the ingress-nginx context and thereby read any Secrets reachable by the controller. In standard deployments this exposure extends to all Secrets across the cluster.

Public references include a Kubernetes GitHub issue, a NetApp security advisory, and an Exploit-DB entry that publishes working exploit code. The associated EPSS score stands at 0.9192 with no subsequent rise reported.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A06:2025 Insecure Design

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A security issue was discovered in Kubernetes where under certain conditions, an unauthenticated attacker with access to the pod network can achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the ingress-nginx controller. This can lead to disclosure of Secrets accessible…

more

to the controller. (Note that in the default installation, the controller can access all Secrets cluster-wide.)

CWE(s)
CWE-653

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1611 Escape to Host Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may break out of a container or virtualized environment to gain access to the underlying host.
attack.mitre.org →
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1134 Access Token Manipulation Stealth
Adversaries may modify access tokens to operate under a different user or system security context to perform actions and bypass access controls.
attack.mitre.org →
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
attack.mitre.org →
T1548.001 Setuid and Setgid Privilege Escalation
An adversary may abuse configurations where an application has the setuid or setgid bits set in order to get code running in a different (and possibly more privileged) user’s context.
attack.mitre.org →
T1055 Process Injection Stealth
Adversaries may inject code into processes in order to evade process-based defenses as well as possibly elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-0137Shared CWE-653
CVE-2025-41116Shared CWE-653
CVE-2025-3717Shared CWE-653
CVE-2026-4325Shared CWE-653
CVE-2026-53405Shared CWE-653
CVE-2024-0135Shared CWE-653
CVE-2024-57720Shared CWE-653
CVE-2026-5600Shared CWE-653
CVE-2025-24986Shared CWE-653
CVE-2025-27027Shared CWE-653

Affected Assets

Https:
—
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 8 hardening rules · 7 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

—

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SC-3 Security Function Isolation good match

Security function isolation is the canonical mechanism for protecting higher-privilege compartments.

SC-39 Process Isolation good match

Process isolation maintains separate execution domains so one process cannot affect another’s privilege level.

SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality good match

Explicit separation of user and management functionality implements the required compartmentalization.

SC-32 System Partitioning good match

System partitioning creates distinct domains that enforce isolation between differently privileged components.

AC-3 Access Enforcement partial match

Access enforcement directly requires approved authorizations to be applied to compartmentalized resources.

AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement partial match

Information flow enforcement structurally prevents unauthorized mixing of data or functions across privilege boundaries.

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.

PR.AA-05 full match
prevents

Least-privilege policy directly enforces separation of privilege levels and access rights.

PR.IR-01 mostly match
prevents

Network and environment segmentation implements the isolation required to prevent unauthorized cross-compartment access.

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.

A.5.3 Segregation of duties mostly match
degrades

Segregation of duties directly enforces separation of privilege levels and functions.

A.8.22 Segregation of networks mostly match
prevents

Network segregation is a classic technical control for isolating different privilege domains.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles mostly match
prevents

Secure system architecture principles explicitly call for isolation and least-privilege boundaries.

A.8.31 Separation of development, test and production environments mostly match
prevents

Separation of development, test and production environments is a direct application of compartmentalization.

A.5.15 Access control partial match
degrades

Access control policies establish the boundaries that isolation must enforce.

A.5.18 Access rights partial match
degrades

Managing access rights is the operational mechanism for compartmentalizing privileges.

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 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
  • V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
  • V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-653
Windows 10 (1 rule)
  • V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653
Windows 11 (1 rule)
  • V-253269 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
  • V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653

References