Vulnerabilidades do Red Hat Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4

The insights-runtime-extractor runs as a privileged DaemonSet (`hostPID: true`) that scans container processes for runtime fingerprinting. When scanning a container, the coordinator: 1. **fork()s** a child process 2. **setns()** into the target container's PID and mount namespaces 3. **fchdir()** back to an orphaned FD pointing at the extractor's own root filesystem (where `/crio.sock` is hostPath-mounted) 4. Calls **only `seteuid(target_uid)`** — changing the effective UID but leaving the **real UID and saved-set-UID at 0** and **retaining the permitted capability set** 5. The `check_no_privileged_perms()` guard inspects only the Effective capability set (so it passes), and is **skipped entirely when the target runs as uid 0** 6. The `VersionExecutable` fingerprint invokes `fpr_kind_executable` with `process.command_line[0]` — the target's argv[0], read from `/proc/<pid>/cmdline` and **fully controlled by the workload** 7. `fpr_kind_executable` calls `exec.Command(executable, "--version").Output()` — executing the **workload's own binary** inside the workload's mount namespace while **ruid=0 in the host user namespace** The executed process can call `setuid(0)` to restore full root with `CAP_SYS_ADMIN`, and inherits the orphaned cwd which resolves into the extractor container's filesystem containing the host CRI-O socket. ## Affected Code ### 1. Insufficient privilege drop (Rust — extractor coordinator) **File:** `extractor/src/insights_runtime_extractor.rs` ```rust // Lines 139-146 — seteuid-only drop, guard skipped for root containers join_process_namespaces(process.pid)?; change_dir(current_dir); switch_user(*process.uid)?; if *process.uid != 0 { perms::check_no_privileged_perms() .expect("Must not have privileged permissions to run fingerprints"); } fingerprint::run_fingerprints(&config, out_dir, &process); ``` ```rust // Lines 182-185 — only effective UID changed; ruid/suid stay 0 fn switch_user(uid: u32) -> Result<(), ScannerError> { debug!("... Becoming user: {uid}"); seteuid(uid.into()).map_err(|e| ScannerError::Errno(e)) } ``` ### 2. Execution of untrusted binary (Go — fingerprint) **File:** `fingerprints/pkg/utils/file.go` ```go // Lines 75-80 — executes a path taken verbatim from workload's argv[0] func GetExecutableVersionOutput(executable string) (string, error) { out, err := exec.Command(executable, "--version").Output() if err != nil { return "", err } return string(out), nil } ``` ### 3. Workload-controlled path forwarded (Rust — version_executable) **File:** `version_executable.rs` ```rust // Lines 29-34 — workload-controlled command_line[0] forwarded to fingerprint return Some(vec![ fpr_kind_executable, out_dir.to_string(), String::from(&process.command_line[0]), String::from(&version_executable.runtime_kind_name), ]); ``` ## Attack Pattern **Attacker:** Any tenant able to schedule a pod (unprivileged, any namespace) **Victim:** The node running the insights-runtime-extractor DaemonSet **Trigger:** Automatic — the DaemonSet scans all container processes on the node **Attack sequence:** 1. Attacker creates a pod whose process name matches a configured versioned-executable pattern (`node`, `python`, `python3`, `MainThread`, or contains `java`) 2. The pod's main binary (at the path matching argv[0]) is a malicious executable that calls `setuid(0)` to restore root 3. When the insights operator triggers a scan, the DaemonSet forks, enters the attacker's mount namespace, and executes the attacker's binary with ruid=0 4. The attacker's code regains full root with `CAP_SYS_ADMIN` in the host user namespace 5. The inherited cwd contains the host CRI-O socket → full node compromise

A flaw was found in the OpenShift console. An authenticated console user can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability by providing a specially crafted Helm chart URL without proper validation. This allows the user to make the console pod fetch arbitrary URLs, potentially leading to the disclosure of sensitive information through error messages or enabling blind port scanning within the cluster.

A flaw was found in ansible-core. When installing a collection with `ansible-galaxy collection install`, the archive extractor validates member paths using lexical path normalisation (os.path.abspath) instead of resolving symbolic links (os.path.realpath), and it performs no containment check on symlink-typed directory members before creating them. A crafted collection tarball can chain symlink directory entries so that a subsequent file member is written outside the intended destination directory. This allows an attacker who can get a victim to install a malicious collection to overwrite arbitrary files with the privileges of the user running ansible-galaxy, leading to code execution on the control node. This is a bypass of the fix for CVE-2020-10691.

The `insights-operator-gather` ClusterRole grants the operator's service account read access to secrets in the core API group with no namespace or resourceNames restriction — therefore, access to every secret in every namespace in the cluster. Ref: https://github.com/openshift/insights-operator/blob/8f15e3157ff09f54ab22801f5b21da35a195cc6d/manifests/03-clusterrole.yaml#L368-L373 ``` - apiGroups: - "" resources: - secrets verbs: - get - list ``` By spawning a pod with the gather service account mounted, an attacker will be able to access any secret in any namespace. ``` spec: serviceAccountName:"gather" ```

A flaw was found in SSSD. In trust-enabled identity management environments, SSSD evaluates Host-Based Access Control (HBAC) rules by stripping domain qualifiers and comparing only short usernames. An authenticated user in a trusted domain who shares the same username as an authorized local account can bypass access policies and gain unauthorized access to protected services or hosts.