CVE-2023-34091
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 · uneditedKyverno is a policy engine designed for Kubernetes. In versions of Kyverno prior to 1.10.0, resources which have the `deletionTimestamp` field defined can bypass validate, generate, or mutate-existing policies, even in cases where the `validationFailureAction` field is set to `Enforce`. This situation occurs as resources pending deletion were being consciously exempted by Kyverno, as a way to reduce processing load as policies are typically not applied to objects which are being deleted. However, this could potentially result in allowing a malicious user to leverage the Kubernetes finalizers feature by setting a finalizer which causes the Kubernetes API server to set the `deletionTimestamp` and then not completing the delete operation as a way to explicitly to bypass a Kyverno policy. Note that this is not applicable to Kubernetes Pods but, as an example, a Kubernetes Service resource can be manipulated using an indefinite finalizer to bypass policies. This is resolved in Kyverno 1.10.0. There is no known workaround.
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 confidenceKyverno versions prior to 1.10.0 incorrectly exempt resources with a `deletionTimestamp` from all policy enforcement (validate, generate, mutate-existing), even when `validationFailureAction` is set to `Enforce`. Attackers can exploit this by adding a finalizer that triggers `deletionTimestamp` without completing deletion, allowing them to bypass policy controls on resources like Services.
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< 1.10.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Identify installed Kyverno versionRun `kubectl get deployment -n kyverno kyverno -o jsonpath='{.spec.template.spec.containers[*].image}'` or check your Helm release versionAffected if The returned version is earlier than 1.10.0
-
Verify Kyverno policies with Enforce mode existRun `kubectl get cpol,clusterpolicy -o jsonpath='{range .items[*]}{.metadata.name}{"\n"}{.spec.validationFailureAction}{"\n"}{end}'`Affected if Any policy shows `validationFailureAction: Enforce` and Kyverno version is below 1.10.0
-
Check for resources with deletionTimestampRun `kubectl get all --all-namespaces -o jsonpath='{range .items[?(@.metadata.deletionTimestamp)]}{.kind}{"/"}{.metadata.namespace}{"/"}{.metadata.name}{"\t"}{.metadata.deletionTimestamp}{"\n"}{end}'`Affected if Resources exist with deletionTimestamp set while Kyverno is below 1.10.0 and Enforce policies are present
-
Review resources with finalizers that could set deletionTimestampRun `kubectl get all --all-namespaces -o jsonpath='{range .items[?(@.metadata.finalizers)]}{.kind}{"/"}{.metadata.namespace}{"/"}{.metadata.name}{"\n"}{end}'`Affected if Finalizers are present on resources and Kyverno version is below 1.10.0 with Enforce policies configured
You are affected if running any Kyverno version prior to 1.10.0 AND you have policies set to validationFailureAction: Enforce, combined with resources that have deletionTimestamp set (or finalizers that could trigger it) in your 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.
dbcve · scoped1.10.0
Upgrade Kyverno to version 1.10.0 or later. No workaround exists; this is a mandatory upgrade to remediate the vulnerability.
Kyverno 1.10.0
- Upgrade Kyverno to version 1.10.0 or later to resolve the policy bypass vulnerability.
- Verify the upgrade by checking that Kyverno is enforcing policies on resources with deletionTimestamp set (e.g., resources with finalizers that keep them in a deleting state).
- Test your existing policies to ensure they work correctly after the upgrade, particularly any policies that should apply to resources being deleted.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-34091 — 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-2023-34091 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