Vulnerability from bitnami_vulndb
Published
2025-03-26 07:08
Modified
2025-09-09 06:08
Summary
East-west traffic not subject to egress policy enforcement for requests via Gateway API load balancers
Details

Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. For Cilium users who use Gateway API for Ingress for some services and use LB-IPAM or BGP for LB Service implementation and use network policies to block egress traffic from workloads in a namespace to workloads in other namespaces, egress traffic from workloads covered by such network policies to LoadBalancers configured by Gateway resources will incorrectly be allowed. LoadBalancer resources not deployed via a Gateway API configuration are not affected by this issue. This issue affects: Cilium v1.15 between v1.15.0 and v1.15.14 inclusive, v1.16 between v1.16.0 and v1.16.7 inclusive, and v1.17 between v1.17.0 and v1.17.1 inclusive. This issue is fixed in Cilium v1.15.15, v1.16.8, and v1.17.2. A Clusterwide Cilium Network Policy can be used to work around this issue for users who are unable to upgrade.


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Bitnami",
        "name": "cilium",
        "purl": "pkg:bitnami/cilium"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.15.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.17.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "SEMVER"
        }
      ],
      "severity": [
        {
          "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N",
          "type": "CVSS_V3"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-30162"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cpes": [
      "cpe:2.3:a:cilium:cilium:*:*:*:*:*:go:*:*"
    ],
    "severity": "Medium"
  },
  "details": "Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. For Cilium users who use Gateway API for Ingress for some services and use LB-IPAM or BGP for LB Service implementation and use network policies to block egress traffic from workloads in a namespace to workloads in other namespaces, egress traffic from workloads covered by such network policies to LoadBalancers configured by `Gateway` resources will incorrectly be allowed. LoadBalancer resources not deployed via a Gateway API configuration are not affected by this issue. This issue affects: Cilium v1.15 between v1.15.0 and v1.15.14 inclusive, v1.16 between v1.16.0 and v1.16.7 inclusive, and v1.17 between v1.17.0 and v1.17.1 inclusive. This issue is fixed in Cilium v1.15.15, v1.16.8, and v1.17.2. A Clusterwide Cilium Network Policy can be used to work around this issue for users who are unable to upgrade.",
  "id": "BIT-cilium-2025-30162",
  "modified": "2025-09-09T06:08:46.021Z",
  "published": "2025-03-26T07:08:03.178Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/lb-ipam"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/cilium/security/advisories/GHSA-24qp-4xx8-3jvj"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/cilium/proxy/pull/1172"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-30162"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.5.0",
  "summary": "East-west traffic not subject to egress policy enforcement for requests via Gateway API load balancers"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…