Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-96jv-vj39-x4j6 CVE-2022-1025 CVE-2022-24768 GHSA-2f5v-8r3f-8pww GO-2022-0359 GO-2022-0516

Argo CD improper access control bug can allow malicious user to escalate privileges to admin level

High Go
Severity
8.8 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
1.34%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 71.41% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-1220 Insufficient Granularity of Access Control
CWE-284 Improper Access Control
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
Available
2 packages have a fixed version

Description

Impact

Impacts for versions starting with v1.0.0

All unpatched versions of Argo CD starting with v1.0.0 are vulnerable to an improper access control bug, allowing a malicious user to potentially escalate their privileges to admin-level.

To perform the following exploits, an authorized Argo CD user must have push access to an Application's source git or Helm repository or sync and override access to an Application. Once a user has that access, different exploitation levels are possible depending on their other RBAC privileges:

  1. If that user has update access to the Application, they can modify any resource on the Application's destination cluster. If the destination cluster is or can be made to be the same as the cluster hosting Argo CD, the user can escalate their Argo CD permissions to admin-level.
  2. If the user has delete access to the Application, they can delete any resource on the Application's destination cluster. (This exploit is possible starting with v0.8.0.)
  3. If the user has get access to the Application, they can view any resource on the Application's destination cluster (except for the contents of Secrets) and list actions available for that resource.
  4. If the user has get access to the Application, they can view the logs of any Pods on the Application's destination cluster.
  5. If the user has action/{some action or *} access on the Application, they can run an action for any resource (which supports the allowed action(s)) on the Application's destination cluster. (Some actions are available in Argo CD by default, and others may be configured by an Argo CD admin.)

See the Argo CD RBAC documentation for an explanation of the privileges available in Argo CD.

Events exploit

A related exploit is possible for a user with get access to an Application even if they do not have access to the Application's source git or Helm repository or sync and override access to the Application. The user can access any Event in the Application's destination cluster if they know the involved object's name, UID, and namespace.

Impacts for versions starting with v0.8.0

The same bug exists starting with v0.8.0, but only the following exploits were possible before v1.0.0:

  • The delete exploit (#⁠2 above).
  • The logs exploit (#⁠4 above).
  • The Events exploit described above.

Impacts for versions starting with v0.5.0

The same bug exists starting with v0.5.0 (when RBAC was implemented), but only the Events exploit described above was possible before v0.8.0.

Patches A patch for this vulnerability has been released in the following Argo CD versions:

  • v2.3.2
  • v2.2.8
  • v2.1.14

Versions 2.0.x and earlier users: See the changelog for links to upgrade instructions for your version. It is imperative to upgrade quickly, but some limited mitigations are described in the next section.

argo-helm chart users: Argo CD users deploying v2.3.x with argo-helm can upgrade the chart to version 4.2.2. Argo CD 2.2 and 2.1 users can set the global.image.tag value to the latest in your current release series (v2.2.8, or v2.1.14). Since charts for the 2.2 and 2.1 series are no longer maintained, you will need to either leave the value override in place or upgrade to the 4.x chart series (and therefore to Argo CD 2.3).

Workarounds

The only certain way to avoid the vulnerability is to upgrade.

Mitigations

  • To avoid privilege escalation:
    • Limit who has push access to Application source repositories or sync + override access to Applications.
  • Limit which repositories are available in projects where users have update access to Applications.
    • To avoid unauthorized resource inspection/tampering:
    • Limit who has delete, get, or action access to Applications.

These mitigations can help limit potential damage, but they are not a substitute for upgrading. It is necessary to upgrade immediately.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
>= 0.5.0, < 2.1.14
2.1.14
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
>= 2.2.0, < 2.2.8
2.2.8
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
>= 2.3.0, < 2.3.2
2.3.2
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
>= 0.5.0, <= 1.8.7
 No fix yet
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
>= 0.5.0
 No fix yet
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2
< 2.1.14
2.1.14
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2
>= 2.2.0, < 2.2.8
2.2.8
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2
>= 2.3.0, < 2.3.2
2.3.2
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2
< 2.1.14
>= 2.2.0, < 2.2.8
>= 2.3.0, < 2.3.2
2.1.14
2.2.8
2.3.2

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

github.com/argoproj/argo-cd Go → 2.1.14

go
go get github.com/argoproj/argo-cd@v2.1.14 && go mod tidy

github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2 Go → 2.1.14

go
go get github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v2@v2.1.14 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.8

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-1220: Insufficient Granularity of Access Control

The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation, Testing: Access-control-policy protections must be reviewed for design inconsistency and common weaknesses. Access-control-policy definition and programming flow must be tested in pre-silicon, post-silicon testing.

CWE-284: Improper Access Control

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
  • Architecture and Design: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
  • Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
  • System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.

References

Advisories

Packages

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-fmxq-cgp8-87wp
Argo CD: AppProject destination-namespace and resource restrictions bypassed by PreDelete/PostDelete resource hooks
Critical Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GHSA-j6cw-g6p4-7hch
Argo CD repo-server command injection via crafted SSH repository SOCKS5 proxy URL
High Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GHSA-h98r-wv3h-fr38
Argo CD: Stored XSS in application link annotations enables developer-to-admin privilege escalation
High Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GO-2026-5618
Argo CD: Kubernetes Secret Extraction via ArgoCD ServerSideDiff via sensitive annotations
Medium Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GO-2026-5099
ArgoCD ServerSideDiff is vulnerable to Kubernetes Secret Extraction
Critical Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GHSA-gpx4-37g2-c8pv
Argo CD Unauthenticated Remote DoS via malformed Azure DevOps git.push webhook
High Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GHSA-wp4p-9pxh-cgx2
argo-cd vulnerable unauthenticated DoS via malformed Gogs webhook payload
High Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
GHSA-f9gq-prrc-hrhc
Unauthenticated argocd-server panic via a malicious Bitbucket-Server webhook payload
High Also affects github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor