Mcp Kubernetes ServerApplication · Feisky

CVE-2025-59376

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-09-15
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 0.1.11 or later.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
feiskyer mcp-kubernetes-server through 0.1.11 does not consider chained commands in the implementation of --disable-write and --disable-delete, e.g., it allows a "kubectl version; kubectl delete pod" command because the first word (i.e., "version") is not a write or delete operation.

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 · high confidence

The mcp-kubernetes-server implements --disable-write and --disable-delete flags to restrict certain kubectl operations, but only checks the first command in a semicolon-separated chain. An attacker can bypass these restrictions by chaining a non-restricted command (like 'version') with a restricted one (like 'delete pod'), resulting in unauthorized write/delete operations executing.

MitigationFix the command parsing to split on semicolons and validate ALL commands in a chain against the --disable-write and --disable-delete rules, not just the first command.

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
Mcp Kubernetes ServerApplication
Affected:<= 0.1.11

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
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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 installed version of mcp-kubernetes-server
    Run 'pip show mcp-kubernetes-server' or check the package manager used for installation (npm, pip, etc.) to retrieve the installed version number
    Affected if Version is 0.1.11 or lower
  2. Determine if --disable-write or --disable-delete flags are in use
    Review the command-line arguments or configuration file used to start the mcp-kubernetes-server process; look for --disable-write or --disable-delete in the process arguments
    Affected if Either flag is configured to restrict operations and the server version is <= 0.1.11
  3. Verify the semicolon chain bypass vulnerability
    Send a kubectl command containing a semicolon-separated chain such as 'version; delete pod <podname>' through the mcp-kubernetes-server API while both --disable-write and --disable-delete are active
    Affected if The second command (delete pod) executes successfully despite the restriction flags being enabled

You are affected if running mcp-kubernetes-server version 0.1.11 or lower with --disable-write or --disable-delete flags enabled, and the semicolon chain bypass allows restricted operations to execute.

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 0.1.11
Interim mitigation

Fix the command parsing to split on semicolons and validate ALL commands in a chain against the --disable-write and --disable-delete rules, not just the first command.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Version > 0.1.11 (contact vendor for specific fixed release)

  1. Upgrade mcp-kubernetes-server to a version greater than 0.1.11 that includes the command injection fix
  2. Verify that chained commands (e.g., using semicolons or &&) are properly blocked when --disable-write or --disable-delete flags are used
  3. Test the fix by attempting to execute a chained command like 'kubectl version; kubectl delete pod' to confirm it is properly rejected

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

Fix this in Mcp Kubernetes Server Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,640
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-59376 — 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-2025-59376 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