Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
depthfirst.com
Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
1–5 of 5 posts
Re: Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
#2Even in a product as technically wonderful as Temporal, we can have relatively simple oversights like this that lead to cross tenant leakage.
If anyone is more familiar with Temporal, is there a way clients could have had internal defense in depth that guards against tenant leakage at the provider (Temporal) level?
Re: Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
#3Even in a product as technically wonderful as Temporal, we can have relatively simple oversights like this that lead to cross tenant leakage. If anyone is more familiar with Temporal, is there a way clients could have had internal defense in depth that guards against tenant leakage at the provider (Temporal) level?
Things like this are inevitable, especially these days.
Re: Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
#4Even in a product as technically wonderful as Temporal, we can have relatively simple oversights like this that lead to cross tenant leakage. If anyone is more familiar with Temporal, is there a way clients could have had internal defense in depth that guards against tenant leakage at the provider (Temporal) level?
Don't use namespaces. Wire up multi-tenant at the RBAC level. Need stronger isolation? Run another cluster.
Re: Masked namespace vulnerability in Temporal
#5Even in a product as technically wonderful as Temporal, we can have relatively simple oversights like this that lead to cross tenant leakage. If anyone is more familiar with Temporal, is there a way clients could have had internal defense in depth that guards against tenant leakage at the provider (Temporal) level?
Encrypting tenant data with per tenant keys is a good defense against this kind of thing.