Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

1. IL-0053 Unauthenticated ingress-nginx admission webhook let anyone on the pod network run code and read every Secret in the cluster (IngressNightmare, CVE-2025-1974)

   Wiz2025

   Symptoms

   This is a vulnerability report, not an outage, so nothing failed visibly. A cluster is exposed if it runs Ingress NGINX Controller older than 1.12.1 or 1.11.5 with its validating admission webhook enabled. Wiz suggests `kubectl get pods --all-namespaces --selector app.kubernetes.io/name=ingress-nginx` to find it. The webhook accepts AdmissionReview requests over HTTP without authentication from any pod, and Wiz found more than 6,500 clusters exposing it to the public internet.

   Unauthorised access or a foreign workload

   Trigger

   Wiz Research reviewed the code of the Ingress NGINX admission controller and reported the first findings to Kubernetes on 31 December 2024.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerAdmission webhook

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Found by Wiz Research in a code review of the admission controller, not by an operator.

   Remediation

   • Kubernetes patched the injection flaws CVE-2025-1097, CVE-2025-1098 and CVE-2025-24514
   • Kubernetes removed NGINX configuration testing from the ingress-nginx admission controller, resolving CVE-2025-1974
   • released Ingress NGINX Controller 1.12.1 and 1.11.5

   Lessons

   Admission webhooks often run as web servers inside the cluster without authentication and with relatively high privileges, so any pod can reach them, and the flaws pair well with SSRF in an application. Wiz concludes that `nginx -t` should be considered harmful when it processes unsanitized user input. Wiz recommends upgrading, keeping the webhook off the internet and allowing only the API server to reach it with network policies. If upgrading must wait, disable the webhook (Helm: controller.admissionWebhooks.enabled=false; manual installs: delete the ValidatingWebhookConfiguration ingress-nginx-admission and remove --validating-webhook from the controller) and enable it again after the upgrade.

   View case
2. IL-0106 A malformed Traefik IngressRoute triggered a Traefik v2 bug once a node rollover restarted every Traefik pod, and all Kubernetes services returned 404

   DFDS2021

   Symptoms

   At 08:00 UTC on 2021-09-06 every service in DFDS's Kubernetes cluster answered with 404. Investigation started five minutes later.

   Service outageHigh error rateProbe failures

   Trigger

   The automated Kubernetes node rollover on 2021-09-06 restarted all the Traefik v2 pods, five days after a malformed IngressRoute manifest had been applied.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerCloud load balancer

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effectNo configuration testsExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   All services returned 404 from 08:00 UTC and root cause investigation started at 08:05. Time to detection was 5 minutes.

   Remediation

   • changed the ALB health check path, which made the targets healthy but did not stop the 404s
   • rolled back by hand to Traefik v1 as the main ingress controller
   • deleted the malformed IngressRoute by hand and confirmed the Traefik v2 bug
   • applied the changes upstream

   Action items

   • Upgrade Traefik to v2.5, where the bug is fixed, and verify that it removes the bug
   • Change the Traefik v2 health check path to something more robust
   • Set up an external liveness probe on the ingress controller
   • Consider workload segmentation to limit the blast zone
   • Look into monitoring the Traefik v2 API for rapid changes
   • Look into smoke testing during and after node rollover

   Lessons

   A malformed IngressRoute did nothing visible for five days and then took down all ingress when every Traefik v2 pod had restarted during a node rollover. Because Traefik v2 failed gracefully, the first signals pointed at the ALB health checks instead of at Traefik. On incident handling, the team concluded that appointing an incident manager could have helped, that the war room meeting should be recorded and a log book kept, that people not involved should only make suggestions in writing, and that a short first round of sharing thoughts and gut feelings is useful.

   View case

By root cause1