CVE-2024-53350
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 · uneditedInsecure permissions in kubeslice v1.3.1 allow attackers to gain access to the service account's token, leading to escalation of privileges.
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 confidencekubeslice v1.3.1 has insecure permissions that allow attackers to access service account tokens. This token exposure enables privilege escalation within the Kubernetes cluster, potentially giving adversaries access to sensitive operations and resources they would not normally have permissions to reach.
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<= 1.3.1CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/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.
-
Identify installed Kubeslice versionRun 'kubectl get pods -n kubeslice-system -o jsonpath="{.items[*].spec.containers[*].image}"' or check the operator version with 'kubectl get operator -n kubeslice-system'Affected if The version displayed is 1.3.1 or lower
-
Review Kubeslice ClusterRoles for excessive secrets permissionsRun 'kubectl get clusterrole -o yaml | grep -A 20 kubeslice' to examine Kubeslice-managed ClusterRoles. Look for rules with 'verbs' including get, list, or watch on 'secrets' resourceAffected if Any Kubeslice ClusterRole grants get, list, or watch permissions on secrets across all namespaces or in kube-system
-
Check for overly permissive ClusterRoleBindingsRun 'kubectl get clusterrolebinding -o yaml | grep -B 5 -A 10 kubeslice' to inspect bindings that assign Kubeslice roles to users or groupsAffected if ClusterRoleBindings grant ClusterRoles with broad secrets access to unauthenticated users, service accounts outside kubeslice-system, or users without need-to-know
-
Inspect service account token access permissionsRun 'kubectl auth can-i get secret --as=<system:serviceaccount:kubeslice-system:>' for each Kubeslice service account in kubeslice-system namespaceAffected if Service accounts have permissions to read secrets outside their own namespace or in kube-system
-
Verify RBAC follows least privilege for service account tokensReview all RoleBindings and ClusterRoleBindings referencing 'secrets' in the context of Kubeslice components using 'kubectl get clusterrole -o json | jq -r '.rules[] | select(.resources != null and (.resources | contains(["secrets"])))'Affected if Any rule permits access to secrets containing service account tokens without explicit business justification
You are affected if Kubeslice version is 1.3.1 or lower AND RBAC permissions allow service account token access to unauthorized subjects.
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.
From vendor dataReview and remediate RBAC permissions in kubeslice to follow the principle of least privilege, specifically restricting access to service account tokens.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-53350 — 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-2024-53350 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