dbcve.org
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)Weakness · CWE-918

CVE-2025-13281

MEDIUM · 5.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-12-14
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
64/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable 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
A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

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

This is a half-blind SSRF vulnerability in kube-controller-manager where the in-tree Portworx StorageClass makes requests to user-controlled endpoints. An authorized Kubernetes user can trigger the controller to make requests to arbitrary URLs within the control plane's host network, including link-local (169.254.0.0/16) and loopback (127.0.0.1) addresses, allowing information leakage from internal services.

MitigationMigrate from the in-tree Portworx StorageClass to the out-of-tree (CSI-based) Portworx provider, which does not contain this SSRF vulnerability.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Portworx StorageClass resources
    Run 'kubectl get storageclass' and look for any StorageClass with 'portworx' in the name
    Affected if A StorageClass exists with 'portworx' in the name AND uses the in-tree provisioner (portworx.io/portworx)
  2. Verify the StorageClass provisioner type
    Run 'kubectl get storageclass -o jsonpath="{.items[*].provisioner}"' to see all provisioner values. The in-tree provider uses 'portworx.io/portworx', while CSI uses 'pxd.portworx.com'
    Affected if The provisioner is 'portworx.io/portworx' (in-tree) rather than 'pxd.portworx.com' (CSI)
  3. Check for active PVCs using Portworx storage
    Run 'kubectl get pvc -A -o jsonpath="{range .items[*]}{.metadata.namespace}{'\t'}{.spec.storageClassName}{'\n'}{end}"' and filter for portworx storage classes
    Affected if Any PVC is bound to a Portworx in-tree StorageClass (portworx.io/portworx)
  4. Confirm kube-controller-manager is running
    Run 'kubectl get pods -n kube-system -l component=kube-controller-manager' or check if the kube-controller-manager container/pod exists in the control plane
    Affected if kube-controller-manager is running and the in-tree Portworx StorageClass is present in the cluster

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

Migrate from the in-tree Portworx StorageClass to the out-of-tree (CSI-based) Portworx provider, which does not contain this SSRF vulnerability.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
25.0 hours of engineering $4,400
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-13281 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2025-13281 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