runc: Malicious image with /dev symlink can trigger limited host filesystem integrity violations
runc is a CLI tool for spawning and running containers according to the OCI specification. In versions prior to 1.3.6, 1.4.0-rc.1, 1.4.0-rc.12, 1.5.0-rc.1, and 1.5.0-rc.1, when setting up the container rootfs, setupPtmx and setupDevSymlinks call os.Remove and os.Symlink with a filepath.Join string which allow an image with /dev as a symlink to trick runc into deleting files called ptmx on the host or creating a hardcoded set of symlinks with specific names and targets in an arbitrary pre-existing host directory. This issue is not exploitable under Docker, because Docker creates a top-level read-only layer that masks any malicious /dev symlink
USN-7851-1 fixed vulnerabilities in runC. The introduction of a new
upstream release has caused regressions in runc-app and runc-stable.
This update fixes the problem.
Original advisory details:
Lei Wang and Li Fubang discovered that runC incorrectly handled masked
paths. An attacker could possibly replace a container's /dev/null
with a symlink to some other procfs file and possibly escape a container.
(CVE-2025-31133)
Lei Wang and Li Fubang discovered that runC incorrectly handled the
/dev/console bind-mounts. An attacker could potentially exploit this issue
to build-mount a symlink and escape a container. (CVE-2025-52565)
Li Fub
runc: LSM labels can be bypassed with malicious config using dummy procfs files
runc is a CLI tool for spawning and running containers according to the OCI specification. In versions 1.2.7, 1.3.2 and 1.4.0-rc.2, an attacker can trick runc into misdirecting writes to /proc to other procfs files through the use of a racing container with shared mounts (we have also verified this attack is possible to exploit using a standard Dockerfile with docker buildx build as that also permits triggering parallel execution of containers with custom shared mounts configured). This redirect could be through symbolic links in a tmpfs or theoretically other methods such as regular bind-mounts. While similar, the mitigation applied for the
container escape due to /dev/console mount and related races
runc is a CLI tool for spawning and running containers according to the OCI specification. Versions 1.0.0-rc3 through 1.2.7, 1.3.0-rc.1 through 1.3.2, and 1.4.0-rc.1 through 1.4.0-rc.2, due to insufficient checks when bind-mounting `/dev/pts/$n` to `/dev/console` inside the container, an attacker can trick runc into bind-mounting paths which would normally be made read-only or be masked onto a path that the attacker can write to. This attack is very similar in concept and application to CVE-2025-31133, except that it attacks a similar vulnerability in a different target (namely, the bind-mount of `/dev/pts/$n` to `/dev/console` as configured
runc container escape via "masked path" abuse due to mount race conditions
runc is a CLI tool for spawning and running containers according to the OCI specification. In versions 1.2.7 and below, 1.3.0-rc.1 through 1.3.1, 1.4.0-rc.1 and 1.4.0-rc.2 files, runc would not perform sufficient verification that the source of the bind-mount (i.e., the container's /dev/null) was actually a real /dev/null inode when using the container's /dev/null to mask. This exposes two methods of attack: an arbitrary mount gadget, leading to host information disclosure, host denial of service, container escape, or a bypassing of maskedPaths. This issue is fixed in versions 1.2.8, 1.3.3 and 1.4.0-rc.3.
runc can be confused to create empty files/directories on the host
runc is a CLI tool for spawning and running containers according to the OCI specification. runc 1.1.13 and earlier, as well as 1.2.0-rc2 and earlier, can be tricked into creating empty files or directories in arbitrary locations in the host filesystem by sharing a volume between two containers and exploiting a race with `os.MkdirAll`. While this could be used to create empty files, existing files would not be truncated. An attacker must have the ability to start containers using some kind of custom volume configuration. Containers using user namespaces are still affected, but the scope of places an attacker can create inodes can be significan