KamajiApplication · Clastix

CVE-2024-42480

CRITICAL · 9.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-08-12
Patch available
A vendor patch is available. No clean upgrade release — apply the published patch.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Public exploit Remotely reachable Zero-click Patch available

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
Kamaji is the Hosted Control Plane Manager for Kubernetes. In versions 1.0.0 and earlier, Kamaji uses an "open at the top" range definition in RBAC for etcd roles leading to some TCPs API servers being able to read, write, and delete the data of other control planes. This vulnerability is fixed in edge-24.8.2.

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

Kamaji versions 1.0.0 and earlier contain an RBAC misconfiguration where etcd roles use an overly permissive 'open at the top' range definition. This allows Tenant Control Plane (TCP) API servers to access, modify, or delete etcd data belonging to other control planes, breaking tenant isolation in a hosted control plane environment.

MitigationUpgrade to Kamaji edge-24.8.2 or later. Organizations unable to upgrade immediately should audit existing RBAC policies and restrict etcd role permissions to specific tenant control plane namespaces/key ranges.

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
KamajiApplication
Affected:< edge-24.8.2

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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. Identify Kamaji installation
    Run 'kubectl get pods -n kamaji-system' and check the Kamaji controller manager version, or query the Kamaji operator version via 'kubectl get kamajicontrollers -A -o yaml'
    Affected if Installed version is 1.0.0 or earlier, or version is before edge-24.8.2
  2. Verify Tenant Control Planes are deployed
    List tenant control planes with 'kubectl get tenantcontrolplanes -A' to confirm TCP resources exist in the environment
    Affected if Any Tenant Control Plane resources are present in the cluster
  3. Inspect etcd RBAC role definitions
    Check etcd roles in the etcd cluster used by Kamaji; look for RBAC role bindings with range definitions using wildcard or root-level prefixes (e.g., empty prefix, '/' or '/*' ranges)
    Affected if Etcd roles have 'open at the top' range definitions such as empty or root-prefix ranges that grant access to all keys across all tenants
  4. Audit cross-tenant etcd access
    Review etcd access logs or enable audit logging on etcd to detect any TCP accessing keys outside its own namespace/prefix pattern
    Affected if Any tenant control plane is observed accessing etcd keys belonging to other tenant control planes

You are affected if running Kamaji version before edge-24.8.2 with Tenant Control Planes deployed and etcd RBAC roles use overly permissive range definitions that allow cross-tenant data access.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Patch available Apply the vendor patch
Vendor patch github.com →
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to Kamaji edge-24.8.2 or later. Organizations unable to upgrade immediately should audit existing RBAC policies and restrict etcd role permissions to specific tenant control plane namespaces/key ranges.

Recommended fix High confidence

edge-24.8.2 or later

  1. 1. Backup your current Kamaji installation and any tenant control plane data before upgrading
  2. 2. Upgrade Kamaji to version edge-24.8.2 or later by updating your deployment manifests or using your deployment mechanism
  3. 3. Verify the RBAC configuration for etcd roles has been updated by reviewing the changes in commit 1731e8c2ed5148b125ecfbdf091ee177bd44f3db
  4. 4. Test that tenant control planes can no longer access data from other control planes
  5. 5. Monitor tenant control planes to confirm normal operation after upgrade

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Kamaji Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,920
Get the patch applied

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,072.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-42480 — 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-2024-42480 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