x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-gj2r-phwg-6rww

[GoVulnBot]

In GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-gj2r-phwg-6rww, there is a vulnerability in the following Go packages or modules:

Unit	Fixed	Vulnerable Ranges
github.com/cilium/cilium	1.12.14	<= 1.12.13

Cross references:

• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-c66w-hq56-4q97 #393 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: CVE-2022-29178 #457 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: CVE-2022-29179 #458 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-wc5v-r48v-g4vh #530 NOT_GO_CODE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-pfhr-pccp-hwmh #959 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-4hc4-pgfx-3mrx #1642 NOT_GO_CODE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-8fg8-jh2h-f2hc #1643 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-r5x6-w42p-jhpp #1644 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: CVE-2023-29002 #1730 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: GHSA-2h44-x2wx-49f4 #1785 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE
• Module github.com/cilium/cilium appears in issue x/vulndb: potential Go vuln in github.com/cilium/cilium: CVE-2023-34242 #1862 EFFECTIVELY_PRIVATE

See doc/triage.md for instructions on how to triage this report.

modules:
    - module: github.com/cilium/cilium
      versions:
        - introduced: TODO (earliest fixed "1.12.14", vuln range "<= 1.12.13")
      packages:
        - package: github.com/cilium/cilium
    - module: github.com/cilium/cilium
      versions:
        - introduced: TODO (earliest fixed "1.14.2", vuln range ">= 1.14.0, <= 1.14.1")
      packages:
        - package: github.com/cilium/cilium
    - module: github.com/cilium/cilium
      versions:
        - introduced: TODO (earliest fixed "1.13.7", vuln range ">= 1.13.0, <= 1.13.6")
      packages:
        - package: github.com/cilium/cilium
summary: Kubernetes users may update Pod labels to bypass network policy
description: |-
    ### Impact

    An attacker with the ability to update pod labels can cause Cilium to apply
    incorrect network policies.

    This issue arises due to the fact that on pod update, Cilium incorrectly uses
    user-provided pod labels to select the policies which apply to the workload in
    question.

    This can affect:

    * Cilium network policies that use the namespace, service account or cluster
    constructs to restrict traffic
    * Cilium clusterwide network policies that use Cilium namespace labels to select
    the Pod
    * Kubernetes network policies

    Non-existent construct names can be provided, which bypass all network policies
    applicable to the construct. For example, providing a pod with a non-existent
    namespace as the value of the `io.kubernetes.pod.namespace` label results in
    none of the namespaced CiliumNetworkPolicies applying to the pod in question.

    This attack requires the attacker to have [Kubernetes API Server
    access](https://docs.cilium.io/en/latest/security/threat-model/#kubernetes-api-server-attacker),
    as described in the Cilium Threat Model.

    ### Patches

    This issue affects:

    - Cilium <= v1.14.1
    - Cilium <= v1.13.6
    - Cilium <= v1.12.13

    This issue has been resolved in:

    - Cilium v1.14.2
    - Cilium v1.13.7
    - Cilium v1.12.14

    ### Workarounds

    An admission webhook can be used to prevent pod label updates to the
    `k8s:io.kubernetes.pod.namespace` and `io.cilium.k8s.policy.*` keys.

    ### Acknowledgements The Cilium community has worked together with members of
    Palantir and Isovalent to prepare these mitigations. Special thanks to @odinuge
    for reporting this issue and to @nebril for the fix.

    ### For more information If you have any questions or comments about this
    advisory, please reach out on
    [Slack](https://docs.cilium.io/en/latest/community/community/#slack).

    If you think you have found a vulnerability in Cilium, we strongly encourage you
    to report it to our private security mailing list –
    [security@cilium.io](mailto:security@cilium.io) – first, before disclosing
    them in any public forums. This is a private mailing list where only members of
    the Cilium internal security team are subscribed to, and is treated as top
    priority.
cves:
    - CVE-2023-39347
ghsas:
    - GHSA-gj2r-phwg-6rww
references:
    - advisory: https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-gj2r-phwg-6rww
    - advisory: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-gj2r-phwg-6rww

[jba]

Vulnerability in tool.

[gopherbot]

Change https://go.dev/cl/531705 mentions this issue: data/excluded: batch add 18 excluded reports

[gopherbot]

Change https://go.dev/cl/592763 mentions this issue: data/reports: unexclude 75 reports

[gopherbot]

Change https://go.dev/cl/606791 mentions this issue: data/reports: unexclude 20 reports (11)