Skip to content

Incorrect Default Permissions in CRI-O

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 14, 2022 in cri-o/cri-o • Updated Jan 27, 2023

Package

gomod github.com/cri-o/cri-o (Go)

Affected versions

< 1.24.0

Patched versions

1.24.0

Description

Impact

A bug was found in CRI-O where containers were incorrectly started with non-empty inheritable Linux process capabilities, creating an atypical Linux environment and enabling programs with inheritable file capabilities to elevate those capabilities to the permitted set during execve(2). Normally, when executable programs have specified permitted file capabilities, otherwise unprivileged users and processes can execute those programs and gain the specified file capabilities up to the bounding set. Due to this bug, containers which included executable programs with inheritable file capabilities allowed otherwise unprivileged users and processes to additionally gain these inheritable file capabilities up to the container's bounding set. Containers which use Linux users and groups to perform privilege separation inside the container are most directly impacted.

This bug did not affect the container security sandbox as the inheritable set never contained more capabilities than were included in the container's bounding set.

Patches

This bug will been fixed in the following versions of CRI-O:

  • v1.24.0

Users should update to the version corresponding to their minor release as soon as possible. Running containers should be stopped, deleted, and recreated for the inheritable capabilities to be reset.

This fix changes CRI-O behavior such that containers are started with a more typical Linux environment. Refer to capabilities(7) for a description of how capabilities work. Note that permitted file capabilities continue to allow for privileges to be raised up to the container's bounding set and that processes may add capabilities to their own inheritable set up to the container's bounding set per the rules described in the manual page. In all cases the container's bounding set provides an upper bound on the capabilities that can be assumed and provides for the container security sandbox.

Workarounds

The entrypoint of a container can be modified to use a utility like capsh(1) to drop inheritable capabilities prior to the primary process starting.

Credits

CRI-O would like to thank Andrew G. Morgan for responsibly disclosing this issue, as well as the Moby (Docker Engine) project for working with the other container engines in coordinating a fix.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:


https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3.1#CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
4.8/Medium

Metric Value Comments
Attack Vector (AV) Local An attacker requires local control to launch a container with files that have inheritable capabilities.
Attack Complexity (AC) Low Modifying a file to have inheritable capabilities is not difficult.
Privileges Required (PR) Low An attacker requires enough privilege to cause a container to be launched with a compromised image. Moby's API is typically bound to a local Unix domain socket and requires calls to be made from a process that is either UID 0 or present in the configured group.
User Interaction (UI) Required An attacker must cause the compromised image to be run.
Scope (S) Unchanged The container boundary set by Moby, including the bounding capability set, is not modified. A successful attack gains access to privileges and resources within the boundary, not outside of it.
Confidentiality (C) Low An attacker may gain access to some confidential information through elevation of CAP_CHOWN, CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE, CAP_FOWNER, CAP_SETFCAP, or CAP_SETPCAP, but the exposed information is limited to that which is already inside the container.
Integrity (I) Low An attacker may be able to tamper with data inside the container through elevation of CAP_CHOWN, CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE, CAP_FOWNER, CAP_SETFCAP, or CAP_SETPCAP, or spoof packets with CAP_NET_RAW, but the tampered data is limited to that which is already inside the container.
Availability (A) Low An attacker may be able to affect the availability of an application running inside the container through elevation of CAP_KILL or CAP_NET_RAW, or may be able to affect availability through tampering with file dependencies.

References

@haircommander haircommander published to cri-o/cri-o Apr 14, 2022
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Apr 18, 2022
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 22, 2022
Reviewed Apr 22, 2022
Last updated Jan 27, 2023

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
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

EPSS score

0.044%
(14th percentile)

Weaknesses

CVE ID

CVE-2022-27652

GHSA ID

GHSA-4hj2-r2pm-3hc6

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.