| CVE-2026-73500 | CAO8.7 | etcd is a distributed key-value store for the data of a distributed system. Prior to versions 3.5.33, 3.6.14, and 3.7.1, a network attacker who can reach an etcd TLS listener can open many TCP connections and never send a ClientHello. In client/pkg/transport/listener_tls.go, each connection handled by tlsListener.accep | 12/08/2026 |
| CVE-2026-73499 | CAO7.1 | etcd is a distributed key-value store for the data of a distributed system. Prior to versions 3.5.33, 3.6.14, and 3.7.1, a user granted READ permission on a single exact key can use the Watch gRPC API with clientv3.WithFromKey() to receive watch events for every key lexicographically greater than or equal to the permit | 12/08/2026 |
| CVE-2026-44283 | TRUNG BÌNH4.3 | etcd is a distributed key-value store for the data of a distributed system. Prior to 3.4.44, 3.5.30, and 3.6.11, a vulnerability in etcd allows read access via PrevKv, or lease attachment in Put requests within transaction operations, to bypass RBAC authorization checks. An authenticated user without sufficient read or | 14/05/2026 |
| CVE-2026-33413 | CAO8.8 | etcd is a distributed key-value store for the data of a distributed system. Prior to versions 3.4.42, 3.5.28, and 3.6.9, unauthorized users may 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 | 26/03/2026 |
| CVE-2026-33343 | TRUNG BÌNH6.5 | etcd is a distributed key-value store for the data of a distributed system. Prior to versions 3.4.42, 3.5.28, and 3.6.9, an authenticated user with RBAC restricted permissions on key ranges can use nested transactions to bypass all key-level authorization. This allows any authenticated user with direct access to etcd t | 26/03/2026 |
| GO-2024-2530 | — | Etcd auth Inaccurate logging of authentication attempts for users with CN-based auth only in go.etcd.io/etcd | 28/06/2024 |
| GO-2024-2529 | — | Etcd embed auto compaction retention negative value causing a compaction loop or a crash in go.etcd.io/etcd | 28/06/2024 |
| GO-2024-2528 | — | Etcd Gateway TLS endpoint validation only confirms TCP reachability in go.etcd.io/etcd | 28/06/2024 |
| GHSA-vjg6-93fv-qv64 | THẤP | Etcd auth Inaccurate logging of authentication attempts for users with CN-based auth only | 03/02/2024 |
| GHSA-pm3m-32r3-7mfh | THẤP | Etcd embed auto compaction retention negative value causing a compaction loop or a crash | 03/02/2024 |
| GHSA-j86v-2vjr-fg8f | TRUNG BÌNH | Etcd Gateway TLS endpoint validation only confirms TCP reachability | 03/02/2024 |
| CVE-2022-34038 | CAO7.5 | Etcd v3.5.4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via function PageWriter.write in pagewriter.go. NOTE: the vendor's position is that this is not a vulnerability. | 22/08/2023 |
| CVE-2021-28235 | NGHIÊM TRỌNG9.8 | Authentication vulnerability found in Etcd-io v.3.4.10 allows remote attackers to escalate privileges via the debug function. | 04/04/2023 |
| GHSA-h8g9-6gvh-5mrc | THẤP | etcd vulnerable to TOCTOU of gateway endpoint authentication | 06/10/2022 |
| CVE-2020-15106 | TRUNG BÌNH6.5 | In etcd before versions 3.3.23 and 3.4.10, a large slice causes panic in decodeRecord method. The size of a record is stored in the length field of a WAL file and no additional validation is done on this data. Therefore, it is possible to forge an extremely large frame size that can unintentionally panic at the expense | 05/08/2020 |
| CVE-2018-16886 | CAO8.1 | etcd versions 3.2.x before 3.2.26 and 3.3.x before 3.3.11 are vulnerable to an improper authentication issue when role-based access control (RBAC) is used and client-cert-auth is enabled. If an etcd client server TLS certificate contains a Common Name (CN) which matches a valid RBAC username, a remote attacker may auth | 14/01/2019 |
| CVE-2018-1098 | CAO8.8 | A cross-site request forgery flaw was found in etcd 3.3.1 and earlier. An attacker can set up a website that tries to send a POST request to the etcd server and modify a key. Adding a key is done with PUT so it is theoretically safe (can't PUT from an HTML form or such) but POST allows creating in-order keys that an at | 03/04/2018 |