CVE-2026-41184
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 · uneditedIn Calico, the install-cni init container logs the rendered CNI configuration to standard output. When the configuration template uses the __SERVICEACCOUNT_TOKEN__ placeholder (Canal/Flannel-Calico deployments), the installer substitutes the live Kubernetes ServiceAccount bearer token before logging, exposing the token to any authenticated user with pods/log permission in the namespace with calico-node. The token holds patch privileges on pods/status, enabling annotation-based attacks against cluster workloads. The default kubeconfig-based authentication path is not affected. This is a direct regression of TTA-2018-001.
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 analysisSensitive values — secrets, tokens, session identifiers, personal data — are written into log files, so anyone with access to the logs, which is often a broad group, obtains them. It turns a routine diagnostic into a credential leak. The fix is redacting sensitive data before it is logged and tightly restricting who can read the logs.
General guidance for the sensitive information in logs class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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< 3.21.7< 3.32.0< 22.4.0>= 3.22.0, < 3.22.3CVSS 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
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 · scoped3.21.73.22.33.32.0
Calico 3.21.7, 3.22.3, 3.32.0, or 22.4.0 (depending on your release branch)
- Identify your current Calico version using 'calicoctl version' or checking the calico-node pod image tag
- Determine which release branch you are on (3.21.x, 3.22.x, 3.32.x, or 22.x)
- For Calico 3.21.x users: Upgrade to version 3.21.7 or later
- For Calico 3.22.x users: Upgrade to version 3.22.3 or later
- For Calico 3.32.x users: Upgrade to version 3.32.0 or later
- For Calico 22.x users: Upgrade to version 22.4.0 or later
- After upgrade, verify the fix by checking that the install-cni init container logs no longer contain ServiceAccount tokens
- Alternatively, apply the vendor patch from GitHub PR #12502 if staying on your current version
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-2026-41184 — 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-2026-41184 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