External Secrets OperatorApplication · External Secrets

CVE-2024-36540

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-07-24
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges 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
Insecure permissions in external-secrets v0.9.16 allows attackers to access sensitive data and escalate privileges by obtaining the service account's token.

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 · moderate confidence

external-secrets v0.9.16 has insecure permissions that allow attackers to obtain the service account token, potentially exposing sensitive secrets managed by the operator and enabling privilege escalation within the cluster.

MitigationReview and restrict RBAC permissions for the external-secrets service account to least privilege, ensuring the token cannot be accessed by unauthorized pods or 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
External Secrets OperatorApplication
Affected:= 0.9.16

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
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

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

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. Check installed External Secrets Operator version
    Run 'kubectl get deployment -n external-secrets' and check the version in the image tag, or use 'helm list -n external-secrets' if deployed via Helm
    Affected if The deployed version is exactly 0.9.16
  2. Identify the service account used by external-secrets operator
    Run 'kubectl get deployment external-secrets -n external-secrets -o jsonpath="{.spec.template.spec.serviceAccount}"' to find the service account name, typically 'external-secrets' in the 'external-secrets' namespace
    Affected if A service account exists and is being used by the operator
  3. Check RBAC ClusterRoleBindings granting access to the service account
    Run 'kubectl get clusterrolebindings -o json | jq -r '.items[] | select(.subjects[]? | select(.kind=="ServiceAccount" and .name=="external-secrets")) | .metadata.name'' to find bindings that reference the external-secrets service account
    Affected if Any ClusterRoleBinding exists that assigns roles to the external-secrets service account
  4. Verify which subjects can impersonate or access the service account
    Run 'kubectl auth can-i --list --as=<unauthorized-user-or-group>' or inspect all ClusterRoleBindings that reference the service account namespace to identify who has access
    Affected if Any ClusterRoleBinding grants permissions to subjects other than the external-secrets operator's own service account or cluster-admin
  5. Check if pods in other namespaces can access the external-secrets service account token
    Review if any RoleBinding in any namespace grants 'get' or 'list' on secrets in the external-secrets namespace, or if any ClusterRole allows impersonation of the external-secrets service account
    Affected if Non-admin users or pods in other namespaces have permissions to read secrets or impersonate the service account

You are affected if the External Secrets Operator version is exactly 0.9.16 AND unauthorized subjects have RBAC permissions that allow them to access the operator's service account or its secrets.

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

Review and restrict RBAC permissions for the external-secrets service account to least privilege, ensuring the token cannot be accessed by unauthorized pods or users.

Fix this in External Secrets Operator Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,840
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36540 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-36540 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