Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
This is a legacy OpenShift 3.x metrics isolation issue. If a project name is deleted and later reused, the new project owner may see metrics left behind by the previous project with the same name. The impact is limited to confidentiality of stored metrics, not code execution or service disruption.
Executive priority
Treat as low urgency unless legacy OpenShift 3.x metrics data contains sensitive operational or customer information. Prioritize inventory and lifecycle review over emergency response.
Technical view
Hawkular Metrics, as shipped in Red Hat OpenShift 3.x, mapped tenants directly to OpenShift project or namespace names. Because tenant identity followed the reusable name, not a unique project instance, deleted and recreated projects with the same name could expose prior metrics data. The listed weakness is CWE-20, improper input validation.
Likely exposure
Exposure is most likely in legacy Red Hat OpenShift 3.x deployments using Hawkular Metrics. The scenario requires project deletion, later reuse of the same project name, retained historical metrics, and a user able to access the recreated project.
Exploitation context
The bundle does not cite active exploitation, and the CVE is not listed as KEV. The issue is a cross-tenant data exposure condition rather than remote code execution. CVSS rates it 3.5, with low confidentiality impact and no integrity or availability impact.
Researcher notes
Evidence is limited to the CVE description, CVSS, CWE-20, affected Hawkular Metrics in OpenShift 3.x, and Red Hat references. No source in the bundle confirms exploitation, a specific fixed version, or a named mitigation.
Mitigation direction
- Check Red Hat CVE and Bugzilla guidance for supported fixes or workarounds.
- Inventory OpenShift 3.x clusters running Hawkular Metrics.
- Avoid reusing sensitive project names until metrics retention behavior is verified.
- Limit project creation rights where namespace reuse could expose retained metrics.
- Review metrics retention and cleanup processes for deleted projects.
Validation and detection
- Confirm whether Hawkular Metrics is deployed in OpenShift 3.x environments.
- Review deleted project names that were later recreated by different users.
- Verify whether historical metrics remain accessible after project deletion and name reuse.
- Check project creation permissions and namespace lifecycle controls.
- Document findings against Red Hat advisory guidance.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-20: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2017-7517 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- Low
- CVSS
- 3.5 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
CVSS vector scores
1 official scoreWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N2.11.4Primary CVE scoreVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 3.1 score
3.5LowVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470414CVE reference
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-7517CVE reference
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Improper Input Validation
Improper Input Validation represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.