VeleroApplication · VMware
CVE-2020-3996
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 · uneditedVelero (prior to 1.4.3 and 1.5.2) in some instances doesn’t properly manage volume identifiers which may result in information leakage to unauthorized users.
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 confidenceVelero versions prior to 1.4.3 and 1.5.2 improperly manage volume identifiers, potentially exposing sensitive volume metadata (such as PVC names or volume handles) to unauthorized users. This information leakage could reveal infrastructure details about persistent volumes in the Kubernetes cluster.
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
VeleroApplication
< 1.4.3>= 1.5.0, < 1.5.2CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Velero versionRun 'velero version' or check the Velero server image version in the deployment: 'kubectl get deployment velero -n velero -o jsonpath="{.spec.template.spec.containers[0].image}"'Affected if The version is earlier than 1.4.3, or between 1.5.0 and 1.5.1 inclusive
-
Verify Velero deployment existsRun 'kubectl get all -n velero' to confirm Velero is installed in the clusterAffected if Velero is deployed and the version from step 1 falls within the affected ranges
-
Check for existing backup resourcesRun 'kubectl get backups -A' to list any backup objects created by VeleroAffected if Backups exist and the Velero version is vulnerable, as the flaw exposes volume metadata within backup data
-
Assess backup access controlReview RBAC policies for backup resources: 'kubectl get clusterrolebindings -o yaml | grep -i backup' and check which users or groups can list or get backup objectsAffected if Users outside the intended scope can access backup resources, which could then view the exposed volume metadata (PVC names, volume handles)
A user is affected if Velero version is less than 1.4.3, or between 1.5.0 and 1.5.1, and backups containing volume information exist in the cluster.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 data1.4.31.5.2
Upgrade Velero to version 1.4.3, 1.5.2, or later to remediate the improper volume identifier management. Verify backup and restore functionality after the upgrade.
Fix this in Velero
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-3996 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-3996 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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