CVE-2025-7445
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 · uneditedKubernetes secrets-store-sync-controller in versions before 0.0.2 discloses service account tokens in logs.
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 confidenceThe secrets-store-sync-controller (a Kubernetes CSI provider for syncing external secrets) in versions before 0.0.2 inadvertently writes service account tokens to log output, exposing sensitive authentication credentials that could be harvested by attackers with log access.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify secrets-store-sync-controller is installedRun 'kubectl get all -A | grep -i secrets-store-sync-controller' or 'kubectl get namespace -A | grep -i secrets' to check if the controller is deployed in the clusterAffected if No secrets-store-sync-controller pods or deployments are found, then this CVE does not apply
-
Identify the deployed controller versionRun 'kubectl get deployment -A -o jsonpath={.items[*].spec.template.spec.containers[*].image}' 2>/dev/null | tr ' ' '\n' | grep secrets-store-sync-controller' to retrieve the container image tag, then compare the version number to 0.0.2Affected if The installed version is any version before 0.0.2 (such as 0.0.1 or older)
-
Confirm logging is enabled for the controllerRun 'kubectl get deployment -A -o json' | jq -r '.items[] | select(.spec.template.spec.containers[].image | contains("secrets-store-sync-controller")) | .spec.template.spec.containers[].env[]' to check if log level is set, or simply verify the controller pods are running (logging is enabled by default)Affected if Controller pods are running and logging is active (default state)
-
Inspect controller logs for exposed tokensRun 'kubectl logs -n <namespace> deployment/$(kubectl get deployment -A -o jsonpath='{.items[?(@.spec.template.spec.containers[].image contains "secrets-store-sync-controller")].metadata.name}') 2>/dev/null' and search for patterns resembling JWT tokens (strings with three base64-encoded sections separated by dots, typically starting with 'eyJ')Affected if Logs contain any service account JWT tokens (base64 strings in 'eyJ...eyJ...eyJ' format)
You are affected if secrets-store-sync-controller is installed at a version before 0.0.2 and its logs contain service account JWT tokens.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade secrets-store-sync-controller to version 0.0.2 or later, and audit existing logs for any exposed service account tokens to determine if credential rotation is needed.
secrets-store-sync-controller version 0.0.2
- Upgrade the secrets-store-sync-controller deployment to version 0.0.2 or later to remediate the service account token disclosure vulnerability.
- Verify the upgrade was successful by reviewing logs to confirm that sensitive tokens are no longer being written to log output.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-7445 — 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-2025-7445 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