CVE-2025-71426
highpriority · track · 28EPSS 0.001 · 3 %ileUSEPSS · scored 2026-10-27
Contrast is a confidential-computing runtime for Kubernetes. In versions before 1.4.1, a recovering Coordinator does not verify the seed supplied by the recovering party. An attacker can therefore stand up a rogue Coordinator whose manifest passes validation but whose secret seed is attacker-controlled. If network traffic is redirected from the legitimate Coordinator to the attacker's Coordinator, a workload owner can be impersonated when they either set a new manifest without comparing the returned root CA certificate against the existing one (the default behavior of the contrast CLI) or verify the Coordinator without comparing the root CA certificate against a trusted reference. Under these conditions the attacker can issue certificates that chain back to the rogue Coordinator's root CA and recover arbitrary workload secrets of workloads deployed after the attack. Secrets of the legitimate Coordinator (seed, workload secrets, CA), workload integrity, and certificates chaining to the mesh CA are not affected.
cvss
Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.
base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 5–7.1
ssvc
A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.
weaknesses
The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.
affected products (1)
Products and version ranges known to be affected.
advisories (2)
Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.
- GHSA-vqv5-385r-2hf8Contrast's unauthenticated recovery allows Coordinator impersonation2025-02-05ghsa · osvUS
### Impact Recovering coordinators do not verify the seed provided by the recovering party. This allows an attacker to set up a coordinator with a manifest that passes validation, but with a secret seed controlled by the attacker. If network traffic is redirected from the legitimate coordinator to the attacker's coordinator, a workload owner is susceptible to impersonation if either * they `set` a new manifest and don't compare the root CA cert with the existing one (this is the default of the `contrast` CLI) or * they `verify` the coordinator and don't compare the root CA cert with a trusted reference. Under these circumstances, the attacker can: * Issue certificates that chain back to the attacker coordinator's root CA. * Recover arbitrary workload secrets of workloads deployed after the attack. This issue does **not** affect the following: * secrets of the legitimate coordinator (seed, workload secrets, CA) * integrity of workloads, even when used with the rogue coordinator * certificates chaining back to the mesh CA ### Patches This issue is patched in Contrast v1.4.1. ### Workarounds The issue can be avoided by verifying the coordinator root CA cert against expectations. * At the first `set` call, keep a copy of the CA cert returned by the coordinator. * After subsequent `set` or `verify` calls, compare the returned CA cert with the backup copy. If it matches bit-for-bit, the coordinator is legitimate.
- GO-2025-3455Contrast's unauthenticated recovery allows Coordinator impersonation in github.com/edgelesssys/contrast2025-02-05vendor · osvUS
Contrast's unauthenticated recovery allows Coordinator impersonation in github.com/edgelesssys/contrast
also known as (2)
Other names and identifiers for this entity.
- GHSA-vqv5-385r-2hf8osv
- GO-2025-3455osv
sources
Which sources assert this record, and when.
references (2) nvd
External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.
Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.
Free scan