🛡️ CVE-2026-53487 — kite

⚪ Unknown ✅ No Known Exploit CWE-862 OSV
N/A
CVSS Score
0 Low4 Medium7 High9 Critical10

Description

Kite has an authenticated cluster RBAC bypass in /api/v1/overview

Summary

Authenticated Kite users with any role can request /api/v1/overview for a cluster that their roles do not permit by selecting that cluster with x-cluster-name. The overview route is registered before middleware.RBACMiddleware() and GetOverview only checks len(user.Roles) > 0, so it returns aggregate Kubernetes inventory and capacity data from unauthorized clusters.

The issue is present on current main commit 38c9bb9d4b746c0d2a8252f3c35cdfa07ab01c21 and latest release v0.12.2 at commit 0aae35abb2d6a8adf623fe60349261aa48753ccc.

Impact

A low-privileged user who only has access to one cluster can set x-cluster-name to another configured cluster and retrieve aggregate inventory and resource sizing data for that cluster. The response includes total node, pod, namespace, service, CPU, and memory values. This bypasses the cluster membership boundary used elsewhere in Kite.

The validated impact is confidentiality only. I did not prove Kubernetes mutation, pod names, secret values, kubeconfig contents, or bearer token exposure through this endpoint.

Technical details

routes.go registers /api/v1/overview before the global RBAC middleware is applied:

  • routes.go:131-133: /api/v1 gets RequireAuth() and ClusterMiddleware(cm).
  • routes.go:135: /api/v1/overview is registered.
  • routes.go:171: api.Use(middleware.RBACMiddleware()) is applied only after overview and several other routes are registered.

pkg/middleware/cluster.go:21-40 accepts the target cluster name from x-cluster-name, query, or cookie and injects the matching ClientSet without checking whether the user can access that cluster.

pkg/system/handler.go:47-52 retrieves the selected cluster and user, but only rejects users with zero roles:

```go

cs := c.MustGet("cluster").(*cluster.ClientSet)

user := c.MustGet("user").(model.User)

if len(user.Roles) == 0 {

c.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, gin.H{"error": "Access denied"})

return

}

```

It then lists nodes, pods, namespaces, and services for the selected cluster at pkg/system/handler.go:63-137 and returns aggregate data at pkg/system/handler.go:147-169.

The intended cluster boundary exists elsewhere. pkg/cluster/cluster_handler.go:19-47 filters /api/v1/clusters with rbac.CanAccessCluster(user, name), and pkg/rbac/rbac.go:32-40 implements that cluster check. The vulnerable overview path skips the same check.

Reproduction

1. Configure Kite with at least two clusters, for example dev-cluster and prod-cluster.

2. Create a user with a role that allows only dev-cluster and does not match prod-cluster.

3. Authenticate as that user.

4. Send GET /api/v1/overview with header x-cluster-name: prod-cluster.

5. Observe that the response includes aggregate inventory and capacity data for prod-cluster instead of returning 403.

I also validated this locally with a Go proof test. The test constructs a fake prod-cluster containing one node, namespace, service, and pod. The user has a role limited to dev-cluster and dev-ns only. Before calling the handler, both controls return false:

  • rbac.CanAccess(user, "pods", "get", "prod-cluster", "_all")
  • rbac.CanAccessCluster(user, "prod-cluster")

The direct handler call then succeeds and returns the unauthorized production cluster aggregate data.

Command run:

```bash

cd /home/unkn0wn/security_audit/kite

go test ./pkg/system -run TestOverviewAllowsUserWithoutTargetClusterRBAC -v

```

Key output:

```text

=== RUN TestOverviewAllowsUserWithoutTargetClusterRBAC

overview_rbac_poc_test.go:74: unauthorized overview response: {"totalNodes":1,"readyNodes":0,"totalPods":1,"runningPods":0,"totalNamespaces":1,"totalServices":1,"prometheusEnabled":false,"resource":{"cpu":{"allocatable":0,"requested":0,"limited":0},"memory":{"allocatable":0,"requested":0,"limited":0}}}

--- PASS: TestOverviewAllowsUserWithoutTargetClusterRBAC (0.49s)

PASS

ok github.com/zxh326/kite/pkg/system 0.711s

```

Suggested remediation

Add an explicit cluster and resource authorization check before any overview data is queried. At minimum, reject users without rbac.CanAccessCluster(user, cs.Name). A stricter fix should require the same resource permissions used by the AI get_cluster_overview tool:

  • get nodes at cluster scope
  • get pods across all namespaces
  • get namespaces at cluster scope
  • get services across all namespaces

Also consider moving every route that lacks its own complete authorization below api.Use(middleware.RBACMiddleware()), or adding per-handler authorization tests for all pre-RBAC routes.

How this vulnerability can be exploited

This issue can be reached over the network, attack complexity is low, an attacker needs low-level privileges on the target. No user interaction is required. The scope is unchanged, so the impact stays within the vulnerable component. Rated impact: confidentiality low, integrity none, availability none.

Weakness class

CVE-2026-53487 is classified as CWE-862: Missing Authorization. No authorisation check is performed before carrying out a restricted action.

Affected software

CVE-2026-53487 is recorded against 1 package.

  • github.com/zxh326/kite

Timeline and source

Published on 7 July 2026 and last revised on 21 July 2026. No public exploit is currently recorded for this entry. Record sourced from OSV.

References

github.com (Web)
github.com (Package)

Details

Severity Unknown
CVSS Score N/A
CVSS Vector CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CWE CWE-862
Public Exploit ✅ No
Source OSV
Published 2026-07-07
Updated 2026-08-12
Modified 2026-07-21
Fix URL N/A

Affected Packages

Software From version Fixed in
github.com/zxh326/kite

Similar Threats

Free Vulnerability Check

Is your site affected by CVE-2026-53487?

BotEraser helps you identify potentially vulnerable plugins and themes by checking your installation against CVE-2026-53487 and other known CVE records.

Scan My Site Free →

No credit card required  ·  Results in minutes

ⓘ Data Notice: The information presented above has been compiled from publicly available internet sources. Boteraser aggregates this data solely for informational purposes and does not independently classify, evaluate, or endorse any findings about the vulnerabilities listed. The accuracy and completeness of this information is the sole responsibility of the original publishers. Boteraser and its operators accept no liability for any decisions made based on this data.