CVE-2025-55196
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 · uneditedExternal Secrets Operator is a Kubernetes operator that integrates external secret management systems. From version 0.15.0 to before 0.19.2, a vulnerability was discovered where the List() calls for Kubernetes Secret and SecretStore resources performed by the PushSecret controller did not apply a namespace selector. This flaw allowed an attacker to use label selectors to list and read secrets/secret-stores across the cluster, bypassing intended namespace restrictions. An attacker with the ability to create or update PushSecret resources and control SecretStore configurations could exploit this vulnerability to exfiltrate sensitive data from arbitrary namespaces. This could lead to full disclosure of Kubernetes secrets, including credentials, tokens, and other sensitive information stored in the cluster. This vulnerability has been patched in version 0.19.2. A workaround for this issue includes auditing and restricting RBAC permissions so that only trusted service accounts can create or update PushSecret and SecretStore resources.
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 analysisThe application fails to correctly restrict what a user can do or reach, so functions or resources are available to people who should not have them. Attackers simply probe for the paths where the check is missing or wrong. The fix is to enforce access-control decisions consistently on every request, evaluated against the acting user rather than assumed from context.
General guidance for the improper access control class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 · scoped0.19.2 or later
- Identify the current External Secrets Operator deployment in your cluster using `kubectl get deploy -n <namespace>`
- Upgrade External Secrets Operator to version 0.19.2 or later. For Helm-based deployments, run: `helm upgrade <release-name> external-secrets/external-secrets --version 0.19.2`
- For non-Helm deployments, update your manifest to use the new version image (e.g., `ghcr.io/external-secrets/external-secrets:v0.19.2` or later)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the deployment: `kubectl get deploy -n <namespace>` and confirm the version matches
- Audit existing PushSecret and SecretStore resources to ensure no malicious configurations were added during the vulnerability window
- Monitor for any unexpected access to secrets across namespaces
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-55196 — 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-2025-55196 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