dbcve.org
OpenshiftApplication · Redhat

CVE-2019-10225

MEDIUM · 6.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2021-03-19
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
A flaw was found in atomic-openshift of openshift-4.2 where the basic-user RABC role in OpenShift Container Platform doesn't sufficiently protect the GlusterFS StorageClass against leaking of the restuserkey. An attacker with basic-user permissions is able to obtain the value of restuserkey, and use it to authenticate to the GlusterFS REST service, gaining access to read, and modify files.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

In OpenShift Container Platform 4.2, the basic-user RBAC role has excessive permissions that allow viewing the GlusterFS StorageClass secret containing the restuserkey credential. Users with basic-user permissions can retrieve this secret and use it to authenticate directly to the GlusterFS REST service, bypassing OpenShift's authorization and gaining read/write access to stored files.

MitigationRestrict the basic-user role from accessing secrets in the GlusterFS StorageClass namespace, or configure the StorageClass to use a non-exposed authentication mechanism. Review and tighten RBAC policies to ensure storage backend credentials are not readable by non-privileged users.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
OpenshiftApplication
Affected:= 4.2
Openshift Container PlatformApplication
Affected:= 3.11= 4.0

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm OpenShift version
    Run 'oc version' or check the cluster version to determine if it is 3.11, 4.0, or 4.2
    Affected if Version is 3.11, 4.0, or 4.2
  2. Identify GlusterFS StorageClass
    Run 'oc get storageclass' to list StorageClasses and look for one named 'glusterfs' or similar GlusterFS-related storage class
    Affected if A GlusterFS StorageClass exists in the cluster
  3. Find GlusterFS StorageClass namespace
    Run 'oc get storageclass <storageclass-name> -o jsonpath={.parameters}' to retrieve the namespace where the GlusterFS secret is stored, typically the namespace where the StorageClass was created
    Affected if The StorageClass references a namespace (usually 'glusterfs' or 'storage-class-name')
  4. Check if basic-user can access secrets in that namespace
    Run 'oc auth can-i get secrets --as=<basic-user-username> -n <glusterfs-namespace>' to test whether a user with the basic-user role can read secrets in the GlusterFS namespace
    Affected if The command returns 'yes', indicating basic-user role can retrieve secrets
  5. Verify the restuserkey secret exists and is readable
    Run 'oc get secrets -n <glusterfs-namespace>' to list secrets, then check if a secret containing 'restuserkey' or similar GlusterFS credentials is accessible to basic-user
    Affected if A secret with GlusterFS credentials (restuserkey) exists in the namespace and basic-user can read it

A user is affected if their OpenShift version is 3.11, 4.0, or 4.2, a GlusterFS StorageClass exists, and the basic-user role can read secrets (including the restuserkey credential) in the namespace where the GlusterFS StorageClass is configured.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Restrict the basic-user role from accessing secrets in the GlusterFS StorageClass namespace, or configure the StorageClass to use a non-exposed authentication mechanism. Review and tighten RBAC policies to ensure storage backend credentials are not readable by non-privileged users.

Fix this in Openshift Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,690
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,304.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-10225 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-10225 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data