CVE-2024-52529: Layer 7 policy enforcement may not occur in policies with wildcarded port ranges in Cilium

Published Nov 25, 2024
·
Updated

Impact

For users with the following configuration:

An allow policy that selects a Layer 3 identity and a port range AND A Layer 7 allow policy that selects a specific port within the first policy's range

then Layer 7 enforcement would not occur for the traffic selected by the Layer 7 policy.

This issue only affects users who use Cilium's port range functionality, which was introduced in Cilium v1.16.

For reference, an example of a pair of policies that would trigger this issue is:

apiVersion: "cilium.io/v2" kind: CiliumNetworkPolicy metadata: name: "layer-3-and-4" spec: endpointSelector: matchLabels: app: service ingress: - fromCIDR: - 192.168.60.0/24 toPorts: - ports: - port: "80" endPort: 444 protocol: TCP and apiVersion: "cilium.io/v2" kind: CiliumNetworkPolicy metadata: name: "layer-4-and-7" spec: endpointSelector: matchLabels: app: service ingress: toPorts: - ports: - port: "80" protocol: TCP rules: http: - method: "GET" path: "/public"

In the above example, requests would be permitted to all HTTP paths on matching endpoints, rather than just GET requests to the /public path as intended by the layer-4-and-7 policy. In patched versions of Cilium, the layer-4-and-7 rule would take precedence over the layer-3-and-4 rule.

Patches

This issue is patched in https://github.com/cilium/cilium/pull/35150.

This issue affects Cilium v1.16 between v1.16.0 and v1.16.3 inclusive.

This issue is patched in Cilium v1.16.4.

Workarounds

Users with network policies that match the pattern described above can work around the issue by rewriting any policies that use port ranges to individually specify the ports permitted for traffic.

Acknowledgements The Cilium community has worked together with members of Isovalent to prepare these mitigations. Special thanks to @jrajahalme for resolving this issue.

For more information If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please reach out on Slack.

If you think you have found a vulnerability affecting Cilium, we strongly encourage you to report it to our security mailing list at security@cilium.io. This is a private mailing list for the Cilium security team, and your report will be treated as top priority.

Other sources

Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. For users with the following configuration: 1. An allow policy that selects a Layer 3 destination and a port range AND 2. A Layer 7 allow policy that selects a specific port within the first policy's range the Layer 7 enforcement would not occur for the traffic selected by the Layer 7 policy. This issue only affects users who use Cilium's port range functionality, which was introduced in Cilium v1.16. This issue is patched in PR #35150. This issue affects Cilium v1.16 between v1.16.0 and v1.16.3 inclusive. This issue is patched in Cilium v1.16.4. Users are advised to upgrade. Users with network policies that match the pattern described above can work around the issue by rewriting any policies that use port ranges to individually specify the ports permitted for traffic.

— MITRE

Affected Software

2 affected componentsFixes available
go/github.com/cilium/cilium>=1.16.0<1.16.4
1.16.4
Cilium Cilium>=1.16.0<1.16.4

Event History

Nov 25, 2024
CVE Published
via MITRE·06:49 PM
Data Sourced
via MITRE·06:49 PM
DescriptionSeverityWeakness
Data Sourced
via NVD·07:15 PM
DescriptionSeverityWeakness
Data Sourced
via NVD·07:15 PM
RemedyAffected Software
Advisory Published
via GitHub·07:35 PM

Frequently Asked Questions

1

What is the severity of CVE-2024-52529?

The severity of CVE-2024-52529 is currently classified as high.

2

How do I fix CVE-2024-52529?

To fix CVE-2024-52529, upgrade to Cilium version 1.16.4 or later.

3

What type of software is affected by CVE-2024-52529?

CVE-2024-52529 affects the Cilium networking and security software.

4

Who is impacted by CVE-2024-52529?

Users employing an allow policy with specific Layer 3 identity and port range configurations are impacted by CVE-2024-52529.

5

Is there a workaround for CVE-2024-52529?

At this time, there are no known workarounds for CVE-2024-52529 aside from upgrading the software.

Contact

SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
132 Wickham Terrace
Fortitude Valley,
QLD 4006, Australia
info@secalerts.co
By using SecAlerts services, you agree to our services end-user license agreement. This website is safeguarded by reCAPTCHA and governed by the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. All names, logos, and brands of products are owned by their respective owners, and any usage of these names, logos, and brands for identification purposes only does not imply endorsement. If you possess any content that requires removal, please get in touch with us.
© 2026 SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
ABN: 70 645 966 203, ACN: 645 966 203