CVE-2023-29002
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 · uneditedCilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. When run in debug mode, Cilium will log the contents of the `cilium-secrets` namespace. This could include data such as TLS private keys for Ingress and GatewayAPI resources. An attacker with access to debug output from the Cilium containers could use the resulting output to intercept and modify traffic to and from the affected cluster. Output of the sensitive information would occur at Cilium agent restart, when secrets in the namespace are modified, and on creation of Ingress or GatewayAPI resources. This vulnerability is fixed in Cilium releases 1.11.16, 1.12.9, and 1.13.2. Users unable to upgrade should disable debug mode.
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 confidenceIn Cilium when debug mode is enabled, the agent logs the entire contents of the `cilium-secrets` namespace which can contain TLS private keys for Ingress and GatewayAPI resources. These secrets are exposed in debug output during agent restart, secret modifications, and creation of new Ingress/GatewayAPI resources. An attacker with access to container debug logs could obtain these private keys to intercept and modify cluster traffic.
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>= 1.7.0, < 1.11.16>= 1.12.0, < 1.12.9>= 1.13.0, < 1.13.2CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Check installed Cilium versionRun 'cilium version' or check the image tag of the cilium-agent pod (e.g., kubectl get pod -n kube-system -l k8s-app=cilium -o jsonpath="{.items[*].spec.containers[*].image}")Affected if The version falls within < 1.11.16, >= 1.12.0 and < 1.12.9, or >= 1.13.0 and < 1.13.2 (versions before 1.11.16, 1.12.9, or 1.13.2)
-
Verify if debug mode is enabledCheck the Cilium agent ConfigMap (kubectl get configmap -n kube-system cilium-config -o yaml) or agent deployment flags for 'debug' option set to 'true'Affected if Debug mode is enabled (debug: true or --debug flag present in agent)
-
Check for existence of cilium-secrets namespaceRun 'kubectl get namespace cilium-secrets' to see if this namespace exists in the clusterAffected if The cilium-secrets namespace exists and contains TLS secrets for Ingress/GatewayAPI resources
-
Inspect recent agent logs for secret exposureReview Cilium agent logs (kubectl logs -n kube-system -l k8s-app=cilium --tail=500) for occurrences of the string 'cilium-secrets' or base64-encoded secret dataAffected if Logs contain raw or base64-encoded TLS private keys from the cilium-secrets namespace
You are affected if running a vulnerable Cilium version AND debug mode is enabled, which would expose TLS private keys in the cilium-secrets namespace through agent logs.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.11.161.12.91.13.2
Upgrade to Cilium versions 1.11.16, 1.12.9, or 1.13.2, or disable debug mode in the Cilium agent configuration.
Cilium 1.11.16, 1.12.9, or 1.13.2 (depending on current branch)
- Identify the current Cilium version running in the cluster using `cilium version` or checking the Cilium agent pod
- Determine the appropriate target version based on the current branch: if on 1.11.x upgrade to 1.11.16, if on 1.12.x upgrade to 1.12.9, if on 1.13.x upgrade to 1.13.2
- Backup current Cilium configuration and Helm values if using Helm (e.g., `helm get values cilium -n kube-system > cilium-backup.yaml`)
- Upgrade Cilium using the appropriate method: for Helm, run `helm upgrade cilium cilium/cilium --version <target-version> -n kube-system` with your existing values, or use `cilium upgrade` CLI if using the cilium-operator
- After upgrade, verify the Cilium pods are running: `kubectl get pods -n kube-system -l k8s-app=cilium`
- Confirm debug logging no longer exposes secrets by checking agent logs for any mention of `cilium-secrets` namespace contents
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-29002 — 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-2023-29002 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