CVE-2024-25631
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. For Cilium users who have enabled an external kvstore and Wireguard transparent encryption, traffic between pods in the affected cluster is not encrypted. This issue affects Cilium v1.14 before v1.14.7 and has been patched in Cilium v1.14.7. There is no workaround to this issue.
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 affected Cilium v1.14 versions before 1.14.7, when both an external kvstore and Wireguard transparent encryption are enabled, pod-to-pod traffic is NOT encrypted despite the encryption being configured and appearing active. This is a silent encryption bypass affecting confidentiality of pod communications.
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>= 1.14.0, < 1.14.7CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/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.
-
Check installed Cilium versionRun 'cilium version' or check the Cilium agent pod image version in your Kubernetes clusterAffected if Version is >= 1.14.0 and < 1.14.7 (e.g., 1.14.0 through 1.14.6)
-
Verify Wireguard transparent encryption is enabledCheck the Cilium configuration for 'enable-wireguard: true' in the ConfigMap or run 'cilium config get' and look for the wireguard.enable settingAffected if Wireguard encryption is enabled in the Cilium configuration
-
Verify external kvstore is configuredCheck the Cilium ConfigMap or agent arguments for external kvstore settings such as '--kvstore' set to 'etcd' or '--kvstore-opt' pointing to an external etcd instanceAffected if An external kvstore (such as external etcd) is configured and in use
All three conditions must be true: Cilium version between 1.14.0 and 1.14.6, Wireguard transparent encryption enabled, AND an external kvstore is configured - if all are true, pod-to-pod traffic is unencrypted despite appearing protected.
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 · scoped1.14.7
Upgrade Cilium to v1.14.7 or later to remediate. There is no workaround; the encryption simply fails without explicit error indication.
Cilium v1.14.7
- Upgrade Cilium to version 1.14.7 or later to remediate the unencrypted traffic vulnerability when using an external kvstore with Wireguard transparent encryption.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-25631 — 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-2024-25631 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