How severe is GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2?

No CVSS score has been assigned to GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2?

GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 affects the following packages: github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest (Go). Ecosystems affected: Go.

How do I fix GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2?

Update github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest to 0.0.0-20250205113217-9df8886b4819 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 in my Go dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

Assume what was exposed is already known: rotate any credential, token or key that the affected component could return, restrict the endpoint to callers that genuinely need it, and strip sensitive fields from responses and error output at the boundary rather than relying on the client not to read them.

Is GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2?

GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.2%, placing it in the 9th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2?

GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 is classified as Information Exposure (CWE-200), CWE-212 (CWE-212), CWE-532 (CWE-532). These weakness types describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 was published on January 29, 2025 and was last updated on February 5, 2025. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐹 Go

Not in CISA KEV

kube-audit-rest's example logging configuration could disclose secret values in the audit logGHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2

Fix: RichardoC/kube-audit-rest@db1aa5b

GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 is a Information Exposure vulnerability in github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest. A fix is available for github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2025-24884GO-2025-3431

Published

Jan 29, 2025

Updated

Feb 5, 2025

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Nov 10, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk+0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs9th percentile — riskier than 9% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🐹github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted? If the "full-elastic-stack" example vector configuration was used for a real cluster, the previous values of kubernetes secrets would have been disclosed in the audit messages.

Patches

Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to? The example has been updated to fix this in commit 9df8886b4819409f566233adc7c3b7a43a4096ba

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading? Replace


          if .request.requestKind.kind == "Secret" {
            del(.request.object.data)
            .request.object.data.redacted = "REDACTED"
            del(.request.oldObject.data)
            .request.oldObject.data.redacted = "REDACTED"
          }

In the vector "audit-files-json-parser-and-redaction" step with


          if .request.requestKind.kind == "Secret" {
            # Redact the secret data
            del(.request.object.data)
            .request.object.data.redacted = "REDACTED"
            del(.request.oldObject.data)
            .request.oldObject.data.redacted = "REDACTED"
            # Remove the previously set secret data - Not bothering to parse it as this annotation shouldn't ever be needed
            del(.request.object.metadata.annotations.["kubectl.kubernetes.io/last-applied-configuration"])
            del(.request.oldObject.metadata.annotations.["kubectl.kubernetes.io/last-applied-configuration"])
          }

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐹Go	`github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest`	all versions	0.0.0-20250205113217-9df8886b4819`go get github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest@v0.0.0-20250205113217-9df8886b4819`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update github.com/RichardoC/kube-audit-rest to 0.0.0-20250205113217-9df8886b4819 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Assume what was exposed is already known: rotate any credential, token or key that the affected component could return, restrict the endpoint to callers that genuinely need it, and strip sensitive fields from responses and error output at the boundary rather than relying on the client not to read them.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ If the "full-elastic-stack" example vector configuration was used for a real cluster, the previous values of kubernetes secrets would have been disclosed in the audit messages. ### Patches _Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?_ The example has been updated to fix this in commit 9df8886b4819409f566233adc7c3b7a43a4096ba ### Workarounds _Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?_ Replace ```yaml if .request.requestKind.kind == "Secret" {

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-hcr5-wv4p-h2g2 in your dependencies?

Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works