GHSA-ggp9-c99x-54gp KubeVirt's Improper TLS Certificate Management Handling Allows API Identity Spoofing
SummaryDue to improper TLS certificate management, a compromised `virt-handler` could impersonate `virt-api` by using its own TLS credentials, allowing it to initiate privileged operations against another `virt-handler`.Details_Give all details on the vulnerability. Pointing to the incriminated source code is very helpful for the maintainer._Because of improper TLS certificate management, a compromised `virt-handler` instance can reuse its TLS bundle to impersonate `virt-api`, enabling unauthorized access to VM lifecycle operations on other `virt-handler` nodes. 
The `virt-api` component acts as a sub-resource server, and it proxies API VM lifecycle requests to `virt-handler` instances.
The communication between `virt-api` and `virt-handler` instances is secured using mTLS. The former acts as a client while the latter as the server. The client certificate used by `virt-api` is defined in the source code as follows and have the following properties:The `virt-handler` component verifies the signature of client certificates using a self-signed root CA. This latter is generated by `virt-operator` when the KubeVirt stack is deployed and it is stored within a ConfigMap in the `kubevirt` namespace. **This configmap is used as a trust anchor** by all `virt-handler` instances to verify client certificates.The `kubevirt-ca` is also used to sign the server certificate which is used by a `virt-handler` instance:In addition to the validity of the signature, the `virt-handler` component also verifies the CN field of the presented certificate:<code.sec.SetupTLSForVirtHandlerServer>The above code illustrates that client certificates accepted be KubeVirt should have as CN `kubevirt.io:system:client:virt-handler` which is the same as the CN present in the `virt-api`'s certificate. **However, the latter is not the only component in the KubeVirt stack which can communicate with a `virt-handler` instance**.In addition to the extension API server, any other `virt-handler` can communicate with it. This happens in the context of VM migration operations. When a VM is migrated from one node to another, the `virt-handler`s on both nodes are going to use structures called `ProxyManager` to communicate back and forth on the state of the migration.This communication follows a classical client-server model, where the `virt-handler` on the migration source node acts as a client and the `virt-handler` on the migration destination node acts as a server. This communication is also secured using mTLS. The server certificate presented by the `virt-handler` acting as a migration destination node is the same as the one which is used for the communication between the same `virt-handler` and the `virt-api` in the context of VM lifecycle operations (`CN=kubevirt.io:system:node:virt-handler`). However, the client certificate  which is used by a `virt-handler` instance has the same CN as the client certificate used by `virt-api`.Although the migration procedure, where two separate `virt-handler` instances coordinate the transfer of a VM's state, is not directly tied to the communication between `virt-api` and `virt-handler` during VM lifecycle management, there is a critical overlap in the TLS authentication mechanism. Specifically, the client certificate used by both `virt-handler` and `virt-api` shares the same CN field, despite the use of different, randomly allocated ports, for the two types of communication.PoC_Complete instructions, including specific configuration details, to reproduce the vulnerability._To illustrate the vulnerability, a Minikube cluster has been deployed with two nodes (`minikube` and `minikube-m02`) thus, with two `virt-handler` instances alongside a vmi running on one of the nodes. It is considered that an attacker has obtained access to the client certificate bundle used by the `virt-handler` instance running on the compromised node (`minikube`) while the virtual machine is running on the other node (`minikube-m02`). Thus, they can interact with the sub-resource API exposed by the other `virt-handler` instance and control the lifecycle of the VMs running on the other node:Impact_What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_Due to the peer verification logic in `virt-handler` (via `verifyPeerCert`), an attacker who compromises a `virt-handler` instance, could exploit these shared credentials to impersonate `virt-api` and execute privileged operations against other `virt-handler` instances potentially compromising the integrity and availability of the managed by it VM.
CVSS v3.1 score: 4.7