Skip to content

etcd: Authorization bypasses in multiple APIs

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 20, 2026 in etcd-io/etcd • Updated Mar 20, 2026

Package

gomod go.etcd.io/etcd (Go)

Affected versions

<= 3.3.27

Patched versions

None
gomod go.etcd.io/etcd/v3 (Go)
>= 3.6.0-alpha.0, <= 3.6.8
>= 3.5.0-alpha.0, <= 3.5.27
<= 3.4.41
3.6.9
3.5.28
3.4.42

Description

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?

Multiple vulnerabilities allow unauthorized users to bypass authentication or authorization checks and call certain etcd functions in clusters that expose the gRPC API to untrusted or partially trusted clients.

In unpatched etcd clusters with etcd auth enabled, unauthorized users are able to:

  • call MemberList and learn cluster topology, including member IDs and advertised endpoints
  • call Alarm, which can be abused for operational disruption or denial of service
  • use Lease APIs, interfering with TTL-based keys and lease ownership
  • trigger compaction, permanently removing historical revisions and disrupting watch, audit, and recovery workflows

Kubernetes does not rely on etcd’s built-in authentication and authorization. Instead, the API server handles authentication and authorization itself, so typical Kubernetes deployments are not affected.

Patches

Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?

These vulnerabilities are patched in the following versions:

  • etcd 3.6.9
  • etcd 3.5.28
  • etcd 3.4.42

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?

If upgrading is not immediately possible, reduce exposure by treating the affected
RPCs as unauthenticated in practice.

  • restrict network access to etcd server ports so only trusted components can connect
  • require strong client identity at the transport layer, such as mTLS with tightly scoped client certificate
    distribution

Reporters

Community efforts help keep etcd secure

The etcd community thanks Isaac David, bugbunny.ai, Asim Viladi Oglu Manizada, Alex Schapiro & Ahmed Allam from Strix security, Luke Francis, and @OLU-DEVX for reporting these vulnerabilities.

Dependency Between Reported Issues

These issues all originate from the same underlying flaw in the gRPC API layer.

They affect the same API surface and share a common root cause. In practice, the fix is implemented as a single, unified change at the API layer, which resolves all issues together.

Given this, we believe these issues are best treated as a single vulnerability and should be assigned a single CVE.

References

@ahrtr ahrtr published to etcd-io/etcd Mar 20, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 20, 2026
Reviewed Mar 20, 2026
Last updated Mar 20, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity Low
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-33413

GHSA ID

GHSA-q8m4-xhhv-38mg

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.