Skip to content

Unbounded admission webhook body in knative.dev/pkg/webhook/admission.go: json.NewDecoder(io.TeeReader(r.Body, ...)) reads attacker-supplied AdmissionReview body without http.MaxBytesReader; affects every downstream consumer (Knative, Tekton, KEDA, Sigstore policy-controller, …) with no API change required to fix at the library level (same shape as CVE-2026-24514 and GHSA-9539-c3xr-w9vm)

Moderate
evankanderson published GHSA-2hw4-c9m4-f2fj Jun 4, 2026

Package

gomod knative.dev/pkg (Go)

Affected versions

<= 0.0.0-20260529

Patched versions

>=v0.0.0-20260531000007-52dbd5ece63f

Description

⚠️ Update (verification, 2026-05-19): C-2 confirmed end-to-end — 4.5× amplification observed (worse than the advisory's conservative 2× claim)

Built a Go PoC (cmd/poc-c2/main.go) that runs the exact 8-line vulnerable snippet from webhook/admission.go:109-117 verbatim under the same http.HandlerFunc shape (the full production admissionHandler at :85 requires *Webhook + AdmissionController + an informer-synced channel + controller-runtime / client-go scaffolding — the bug is the missing http.MaxBytesReader, nothing else in the handler). Bound to 127.0.0.1:18098.

PoC client streamed 2 GiB of a bytes over a raw TCP socket. runtime.MemStats.HeapAlloc sampler:

baseline:  HeapAlloc =     0.32 MiB
peak:      HeapAlloc = 9 217.38 MiB  =  9.00 GiB
ratio:     4.50× the body size

The advisory predicted ~2× from io.TeeReader doubling the body once in bodyBuffer. The observed 4.5× ratio comes from the interaction of two amplifiers: bytes.Buffer.ReadFrom (used by TeeReader-fed bodyBuffer) doubles its backing slice on every grow, so peak occupancy during a realloc is old + new = 3× the live data — and json.Decoder holds its own working buffer in parallel. The advisory's 2× floor is comfortably exceeded.

Downstream impact reminder: this library backs every Knative serving / eventing controller, every Tekton Triggers / Pipelines webhook, KEDA, Sigstore policy-controller, Kpack, and many more. A 2 GiB body to any of those projects' admission webhook ports OOMs the controller at 4.5× the body — i.e., even a 128 MiB request OOMs a 512 MiB-limited Pod.

PoC source + log available on request.


Summary

knative.dev/pkg's admission webhook handler reads the incoming HTTP request body via json.NewDecoder(io.TeeReader(r.Body, &bodyBuffer)) with no http.MaxBytesReader wrapping the body. Because every consumer of knative.dev/pkg/webhook inherits this handler (Knative serving / eventing, Tekton Pipelines, KEDA, Sigstore policy-controller, and others), a single oversized POST to any of those projects' admission webhook ports drives the controller pod into memory exhaustion and OOM-kill. Worse, the io.TeeReader design keeps a verbatim copy of the body in bodyBuffer while the decoder also materializes the parsed struct — so the peak memory usage is roughly twice the body size.

This is the same shape as CVE-2026-24514 (ingress-nginx) and GHSA-9539-c3xr-w9vm (Kyverno admission body OOM) filed today against the same antipattern.

Affected versions

  • knative.dev/pkg — main HEAD on github.com/knative/pkg (verified 2026-05-18 against webhook/admission.go sha 1ad5a1ce0ee7043081cb50fd1acc6d36a9126844).
  • Every release that ships the current webhook/admission.go handler.

Vulnerable code

webhook/admission.go:109-117:

review := admissionv1.AdmissionReview{}
var bodyBuffer bytes.Buffer
if err := json.NewDecoder(io.TeeReader(r.Body, &bodyBuffer)).Decode(&review); err != nil {
    http.Error(w, fmt.Sprintf("could not decode body: %v", err), http.StatusBadRequest)
    return
}

There is no http.MaxBytesReader around r.Body. The standard library's json.NewDecoder will read until EOF or the matching closing }. The io.TeeReader simultaneously copies every byte read from r.Body into bodyBuffer, which the rest of the handler uses for the response trailer / observability.

Downstream impact (the reason this matters)

knative.dev/pkg/webhook is the default admission-webhook scaffolding for the entire Knative + CNCF webhook ecosystem:

Consumer Repo Webhook surface
Knative serving knative/serving resource validation / defaulting
Knative eventing knative/eventing resource validation / defaulting
Tekton Pipelines tektoncd/pipeline Pipeline / Task / TaskRun validation
Tekton Triggers tektoncd/triggers EventListener / Trigger validation
KEDA kedacore/keda ScaledObject / ScaledJob validation
Sigstore policy-controller sigstore/policy-controller ClusterImagePolicy mutating + validating
Kpack buildpacks-community/kpack Image / Builder validation
...

Every one of these consumers ships the same io.ReadAll-equivalent body read with no upper bound. A pod-network-reachable attacker can OOM-kill any of them with a single large POST. failurePolicy=Fail admission webhooks (the secure-default) then take the namespace's or cluster's admission flow offline until the controller restarts.

Impact

  • Class: CWE-770 unbounded allocation. Reachable from any pod-network client.
  • Severity per consumer: depends on how each consumer configures failurePolicy. For projects with failurePolicy=Fail (e.g., Sigstore policy-controller's image-policy enforcement), the consequence is cluster-wide admission outage. For failurePolicy=Ignore, the consequence is "this project's webhook is offline" but the API server continues admitting requests.
  • Severity: matches the broader CVE-2026-24514 / GHSA-9539-c3xr-w9vm. Single-packet DoS on the library; each downstream consumer inherits the bug.

CVSS

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H — 6.5 MEDIUM (per consumer, when scoped narrowly).

When scoped against the library and the breadth of downstream impact: argue HIGH 7.5+ because each consumer's S:C scope-change shadow varies. I'll let knative maintainers pick the final score; from the reporter side this is a library-level finding that's worth tracking at HIGH.

Reproduction

The exact same PoC I built today against Kyverno's admission handler reproduces this:

import socket
total = 2 << 30   # 2 GiB
s = socket.create_connection(('<knative-or-tekton-webhook-host>', 8443))
s.sendall(b'POST /<admission-path> HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: x\r\nContent-Type: application/json\r\nContent-Length: %d\r\nConnection: close\r\n\r\n' % total)
chunk = b'a' * (1 << 20)
for _ in range(total >> 20): s.sendall(chunk)

Observed against the Kyverno admission handler (same antipattern):

baseline:        HeapAlloc=7 MiB     Sys=22 MiB
after read:      HeapAlloc=9500 MiB  Sys=9548 MiB  (4 GiB body → 9.5 GiB peak; io.TeeReader doubles)

For the knative/pkg version, the io.TeeReader doubles the resident memory (one copy in the decoder's accumulating slice, one in bodyBuffer). A kyverno-admission-controller-equivalent Pod with a 256 MiB memory limit OOM-kills with ~128 MiB of body.

Suggested fix

Wrap the request body with http.MaxBytesReader (and add a http.StatusRequestEntityTooLarge branch on the MaxBytesError path):

const maxAdmissionRequestSize = 8 << 20 // 8 MiB — controller-runtime's default; large enough for Kubernetes' own admission objects
r.Body = http.MaxBytesReader(w, r.Body, maxAdmissionRequestSize)
var bodyBuffer bytes.Buffer
review := admissionv1.AdmissionReview{}
if err := json.NewDecoder(io.TeeReader(r.Body, &bodyBuffer)).Decode(&review); err != nil {
    var mbe *http.MaxBytesError
    if errors.As(err, &mbe) {
        http.Error(w, "admission body exceeds maximum size", http.StatusRequestEntityTooLarge)
        return
    }
    http.Error(w, fmt.Sprintf("could not decode body: %v", err), http.StatusBadRequest)
    return
}

This propagates a fix to every downstream consumer with no API change, and the cap can be made configurable per-server via a new field on the webhook.Options struct.

Disclosure

Reporting privately under your security policy. No public disclosure on my side until you have a fix or coordinated timeline. Encourage maintainers to coordinate with downstream consumers (Knative, Tekton, KEDA, Sigstore) on simultaneous release.

Reporter

tonghuaroot (tonghuaroot@gmail.com)

Severity

Moderate

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 v3 base metrics

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

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

CVE ID

CVE-2026-54462

Weaknesses

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits