How severe is GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 has a CVSS score of 7.5/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 affects the following packages: k8s.io/kubernetes (Go), k8s.io/kubernetes (Go), k8s.io/kubernetes (Go), k8s.io/kubernetes (Go). Ecosystems affected: Go.

How do I fix GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

Update k8s.io/kubernetes to 1.13.12 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 in my Go dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for k8s.io/kubernetes, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Is GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 actively exploited in the wild?

Yes. There are 1 known exploit references for GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78, including 1 in-the-wild exploitation observed on GitHub and other sources. Treat this as actively exploitable and prioritize patching immediately. All exploit code should only be run in an isolated sandbox environment for research or authorized testing — never against production systems without explicit written authorization.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 25.9%, placing it in the 98th 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 warrants monitoring and prompt remediation.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 is classified as Improper Input Validation (CWE-20), CWE-776 (CWE-776). These weakness types describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

Is there exploit tooling available for GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78?

A Nuclei detection template exists for GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78, meaning automated scanners can fingerprint it. Public exploit tooling significantly increases real-world risk — prioritize patching and ensure detection coverage. Exploit tooling should only ever be used in isolated, authorized testing environments.

When was GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 was published on May 18, 2021 and was last updated on September 10, 2026. 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

HIGH severity

XML Entity Expansion and Improper Input Validation in Kubernetes API serverGHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78

HIGHFix: kubernetes/kubernetes#83261

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) Improper Input Validation vulnerability in k8s.io/kubernetes. 1 public exploit reference exists, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for k8s.io/kubernetes — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2019-11253GO-2022-0703

Published

May 18, 2021

Updated

Sep 10, 2026

Affected

4 pkgs

Patched

4 / 4

Exploits

1 known

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

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

25.9%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Moderate Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs98th percentile — riskier than 98% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 385,738 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the 10–50% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.

Real-World Exposure

4 pkgs affected

🐹k8s.io/kubernetes🐹k8s.io/kubernetes🐹k8s.io/kubernetes🐹k8s.io/kubernetes

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

Improper input validation in the Kubernetes API server in versions v1.0-1.12 and versions prior to v1.13.12, v1.14.8, v1.15.5, and v1.16.2 allows authorized users to send malicious YAML or JSON payloads, causing the API server to consume excessive CPU or memory, potentially crashing and becoming unavailable. Prior to v1.14.0, default RBAC policy authorized anonymous users to submit requests that could trigger this vulnerability. Clusters upgraded from a version prior to v1.14.0 keep the more permissive policy by default for backwards compatibility.

Specific Go Packages Affected

k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/apiserver

Affected Packages

4 total 4 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐹Go	`k8s.io/kubernetes`	≥ 1.0.0&&< 1.13.12	1.13.12`go get k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.13.12`
🐹Go	`k8s.io/kubernetes`	≥ 1.14.0&&< 1.14.8	1.14.8`go get k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.14.8`
🐹Go	`k8s.io/kubernetes`	≥ 1.15.0&&< 1.15.5	1.15.5`go get k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.15.5`
🐹Go	`k8s.io/kubernetes`	≥ 1.16.0&&< 1.16.2	1.16.2`go get k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.16.2`

Affected Products

2 products · 8 configurations

Application

kuberneteskubernetes

≥ 1.16.0 && ≤ 1.12.10

range

Application

openshift container platformredhat

3 versions

3.93.103.11

Exploits & PoCs

Research use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.

Improper input validation in the Kubernetes API server in versions v1.0-…

github.comNVDOct 2020

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for k8s.io/kubernetes, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update k8s.io/kubernetes to 1.13.12 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

How to detect GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78

A community-maintained Nuclei template exists for this CVE. You can scan for it directly:

nuclei -id ghsa-pmqp-h87c-mr78 -u https://target

Template: Kubernetes API Server - YAML Parsing DoS (Billion Laughs)
Severity: high
Impact: Attackers can cause the API server to crash or become unavailable by consuming excessive CPU or memory resources.
Remediation: Upgrade to Kubernetes v1.13.12, v1.14.8, v1.15.5, v1.16.2 or later versions with fixed input validation.

Template by ProjectDiscovery nuclei-templates (ritikchaddha), MIT licensed. View the full template. Scan only systems you are authorised to test.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatImportant

For Red Hat OpenStack Platform, because kubernetes is not directly used in director-operator, the RHOSP Impact has been moved to Moderate.

Product	Fixed in	Advisory
Openshift Service Mesh 1.0	`jaeger-0:v1.13.1.redhat5-1.el7`	RHEA-2019:3809
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.0	`servicemesh-grafana-0:6.2.2-38.el8`	RHSA-2020:2861
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.0	`servicemesh-prometheus-0:2.7.2-36.el8`	RHSA-2020:2863
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.0	`servicemesh-cni-0:1.0.11-1.el8`	RHSA-2020:2870
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.1	`servicemesh-operator-0:1.1.4-3.el8`	RHSA-2020:2795
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.1	`servicemesh-grafana-0:6.4.3-11.el8`	RHSA-2020:2796
OpenShift Service Mesh 1.1	`servicemesh-cni-0:1.1.4-2.el8`	RHSA-2020:2799
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 3.10	`atomic-openshift-0:3.10.181-1.git.0.3ab4b3d.el7`	RHSA-2019:3239

Frequently Asked Questions

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 in your dependencies?

Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works

CVSS Score

7.5/10CVSS v3 base

Vector breakdown

Attack Vector

Network

Attack Complexity

Low

Privileges Required

None

User Interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Raw vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

CWE Classification

CWE-20Improper Input Validation CWE-776CWE-776

Weaponization

OpenSSF Scorecard

Package health score

kubernetes

7.6/10

Code-Review10/10

Maintained10/10

Branch-ProtectionN/A

Assessed Oct 5, 2026

Timeline

First exploit

Oct 2, 2020

Disclosed

May 18, 2021

Last updated

Sep 10, 2026

Identifiers

GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78

GO-2022-0703

References

Advisorynvd.nist.gov Webgithub.com Webgithub.com Webaccess.redhat.com Webaccess.redhat.com Webaccess.redhat.com Webgist.github.com Webgroups.google.com Webpkg.go.dev Websecurity.netapp.com

Related vulnerabilities

This CVE is high severity; 2 of 8 other CVEs affecting kubernetes are rated as high or higher (top: high).

CVE-2025-13281CVE-2025-5187CVE-2025-4563CVE-2025-1767CVE-2024-9042CVE-2025-0426CVE-2024-10220CVE-2024-0793

Provenance

Sources

OSV.devNVDFIRST.org (EPSS)

Last verifiedSep 10, 2026

XML Entity Expansion and Improper Input Validation in Kubernetes API serverGHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78

EPSS Exploitation Probability

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

Description

Specific Go Packages Affected

Affected Packages

Affected Products

Detection & mitigation playbook

Detect

Fix

Workarounds

How to detect GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78

Fixing This On Your OS

Frequently Asked Questions

Is GHSA-pmqp-h87c-mr78 in your dependencies?