CVE-2024-28249: Cilium has possible unencrypted traffic between nodes when using IPsec and L7 policies
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 24/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.27% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: github.com/cilium/cilium (Go) 1.14.8, 1.15.2, 1.13.13.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to github.com/cilium/cilium (Go) 1.14.8, 1.15.2, 1.13.13 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Prior to versions 1.13.13, 1.14.8, and 1.15.2, in Cilium clusters with IPsec enabled and traffic matching Layer 7 policies, IPsec-eligible traffic between a node's Envoy proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted and IPsec-eligible traffic between a node's DNS proxy and pods on other nodes is sent unencrypted. This issue has been resolved in Cilium 1.15.2, 1.14.8, and 1.13.13. There is no known workaround for this issue.
- Published
- Mar 18, 2024
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 19th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-311
Report tools
Action score
24
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 24 / 40 · 6.1 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 6.1
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 6.1
- agree
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| cilium | cilium | cpe:2.3:a:cilium:cilium |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- cilium ciliumbefore 1.13.13
- cilium cilium1.14.0 and later · before 1.14.8
- cilium cilium1.15.0 and later · before 1.15.2
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
cilium cilium
- < 1.13.13, >= 1.14.0, < 1.14.8, >= 1.15.0, < 1.15.2affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/cilium/cilium | from 1.14.0 · before 1.14.8 | 1.14.8 |
| Go | github.com/cilium/cilium | from 1.15.0 · before 1.15.2 | 1.15.2 |
| Go | github.com/cilium/cilium | before 1.13.13 | 1.13.13 |
Same product
cilium: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2023-27595Cilium eBPF filters may be temporarily removed during agent restart39Monitor
- CVE-2023-39347Cilium NetworkPolicy bypass via pod labels36Monitor
- CVE-2026-56742Cilium: Namespaced HTTPRoutes can redirect traffic to other namespaces35Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-25631Feb 20, 2024 · Unencrypted traffic between pods when using Wireguard and an external kvstore21Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-28248Mar 18, 2024 · Cilium intermittent HTTP policy bypass28Monitor
- Later →CVE-2024-28250Mar 18, 2024 · Cilium has possible unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies24Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Go:github.com/cilium/cilium | 1.13.13 | Package registry (OSV) |
| Go:github.com/cilium/cilium | 1.14.8 | Package registry (OSV) |
| Go:github.com/cilium/cilium | 1.15.2 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2024-282500 days apartCilium has possible unencrypted traffic between nodes when using WireGuard and L7 policies24Monitor
- CVE-2024-2563027 days apartCilium has unencrypted ingress/health traffic when using Wireguard transparent encryption21Monitor
- CVE-2024-2563127 days apartUnencrypted traffic between pods when using Wireguard and an external kvstore21Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-311 · Missing Encryption of Sensitive DataCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Sniffing AttacksCAPEC-157Medium
- Sniffing Network TrafficCAPEC-158Medium
- Lifting Sensitive Data Embedded in CacheCAPEC-204Medium
- Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP CookiesCAPEC-31likelihood: High · High
- Retrieve Embedded Sensitive DataCAPEC-37likelihood: High · Very High
- Harvesting Information via API Event MonitoringCAPEC-383Low
- Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-MiddleCAPEC-384Low
- Transaction or Event Tampering via Application API ManipulationCAPEC-385Medium
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.