Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15: Improper Authorization
CVE-2024-8676 is a high-severity improper authorization vulnerability in Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15 from Red Hat, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.4 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.75% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 56% of scored CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15 you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.16 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.17 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.18 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 3.11 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- HighSuccess depends on conditions outside the attacker's control.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N. Scored by CNA (redhat.com).
Official description
A vulnerability was found in CRI-O, where it can be requested to take a checkpoint archive of a container and later be asked to restore it. When it does that restoration, it attempts to restore the mounts from the restore archive instead of the pod request. As a result, the validations run on the pod spec, verifying that the pod has access to the mounts it specifies are not applicable to a restored container. This flaw allows a malicious user to trick CRI-O into restoring a pod that doesn't have access to host mounts. The user needs access to the kubelet or cri-o socket to call the restore endpoint and trigger the restore.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Authorization
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2024:10826
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:0648
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:1908
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:3297
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:4211
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:9765
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-8676
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2313842
Other vulnerabilities in Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15
- 7.4 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.3 Critical severity
Recent Improper Authorization vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.3 Critical severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.