CVE-2026-50570

CVE-2026-50570 is a high-severity improper privilege management vulnerability in github.com/fission/fission (go), affecting versions <= 1.24.0. It is fixed in 1.25.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Fission: Incomplete capability denylist in Environment/Function PodSpec validation allows tenant-added CAPSYSTIME and cross-tenant node wall-clock corruption

Fission v1.24.0 added PodSpec safety validation for tenant-facing Environment and Function CRDs (ValidatePodSpecSafety / ValidateContainerSafety admission webhook + sanitizeContainerSecurityContext executor merge layer), but the
capability check was implemented as a fixed denylist of six Linux capabilities (SYS_ADMIN, NET_ADMIN, SYS_PTRACE, SYS_MODULE, DAC_READ_SEARCH, DAC_OVERRIDE). The denylist omitted CAP_SYS_TIME, among others. As a result, a tenant
who could create a Function or Environment CRD could request securityContext.capabilities.add: ["SYS_TIME"], pass Fission's admission validation and merge-layer sanitization, and run attacker-controlled code with CAP_SYS_TIME in the
resulting function or runtime container.

Demonstrated consequence: cross-tenant node integrity damage via CAP_SYS_TIME. The Linux real-time clock is not namespaced, time namespaces virtualize only MONOTONIC and BOOTTIME, never REALTIME, so a tenant container holding
CAP_SYS_TIME could call clock_settime(CLOCK_REALTIME) and rewrite the shared node wall clock. That corrupts TLS / certificate validity windows, Kubernetes lease renewal, token expiry, scheduling, and time-series for every workload on
the node.

The denylist also omitted SYS_RAWIO, BPF, SYS_RESOURCE, and MAC_ADMIN. Those are documented as evidence that the denylist is structurally incomplete (their practical impact is kernel-, LSM-, or device-cgroup-dependent and is not
exercised in this report).

The deeper structural problem: a denylist on capabilities.add cannot constrain capabilities the OCI runtime grants by default, DAC_OVERRIDE is in the OCI default cap set and reaches the container regardless of any add check,
partially mooting the denylist for its own entries. A capability allowlist (with drop:["ALL"] to remove the default set) is the only model that addresses both problems.

Affected

  • Project: github.com/fission/fission
  • Versions: <= 1.24.0
  • Audited commits: v1.24.0 tag (ce617120) and current HEAD at audit time
  • Component: pkg/apis/core/v1/podspec_safety.go (dangerousCapabilities) and pkg/executor/util/merge.go (dangerousMergeContainerCapabilities)
  • Pre-condition: cluster does not enforce a restrictive Pod Security Admission (PSA) profile on the function-pod namespace. With PSA restricted in force the API server's PodSecurity admission rejects the pod at creation and this
    finding does not apply. Fission added its own PodSpec validation precisely because it cannot assume PSA enforcement.

Fix section (paste into the Fix / Patches field)

Fixed in v1.25.0 by:

  • PR #3465 (commit 2569b42b), replace the denylist with a PSA-restricted allowlist (NET_BIND_SERVICE only) at both enforcement
    layers:
    • pkg/apis/core/v1/podspec_safety.go, ValidateContainerSafety now rejects any capabilities.add entry not in allowedCapabilities. The container check is invoked from ValidatePodSpecSafety for every PodSpec container /
      init-container and from Environment.validateForAdmission for the bare Runtime.Container / Builder.Container.
    • pkg/executor/util/merge.go, sanitizeContainerSecurityContext filters capabilities.add through the same allowlist at every merge site (poolmgr / newdeploy / container executor / builder).
  • The same PR adds 21 bounded CEL XValidation rules covering the cheap pod-level invariants (hostNetwork / hostPID / hostIPC / serviceAccountName / serviceAccount override) on FunctionSpec, Runtime, and Builder, plus
    the bare-Container SecurityContext checks (privileged != true, allowPrivilegeEscalation != true, capabilities.add ⊆ {NET_BIND_SERVICE}) on Runtime and Builder. The API server now short-circuits those attack vectors per CRD
    apply before the webhook is invoked. Per-container PodSpec iteration stays in the webhook because it exceeds the API server's CEL cost budget.
  • The same PR also adds two forward-compat regression guards in pkg/apis/core/v1/podspec_safety_test.go:
    • TestAllTenantContainerSurfacesAreValidated walks every CRD root type via reflection and fails if any reachable *apiv1.PodSpec or *apiv1.Container field is missing from the hand-maintained known-covered set.
    • TestTenantContainerSurfaces_RejectSysAdmin end-to-end exercises each covered surface and asserts ValidateForAdmission rejects a SYS_ADMIN injection at that exact path.

Not addressed in v1.25.0

The advisory's structural recommendation to force capabilities.drop: ["ALL"] at the merge layer is not part of this fix. Fission's own sidecar containers (fission-fetcher, builder) were authored against the OCI default capability
set and need a per-container cap audit before drop:["ALL"] can be applied uniformly. The allowlist on capabilities.add closes the demonstrated CAP_SYS_TIME impact; the OCI-default-cap concern (which the advisory itself marks as
conditional / not demonstrated) is tracked separately.

Impact

The application assigns, modifies, tracks, or checks privileges incorrectly, allowing a user to gain elevated access. Typical impact: privilege escalation beyond the intended level.

CVE-2026-50570 has a CVSS score of 8.5 (High). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (1.25.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/fission/fission (<= 1.24.0)

Security releases

github.com/fission/fission → 1.25.0 (go)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Upgrade github.com/fission/fission to 1.25.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-50570? CVE-2026-50570 is a high-severity improper privilege management vulnerability in github.com/fission/fission (go), affecting versions <= 1.24.0. It is fixed in 1.25.0. The application assigns, modifies, tracks, or checks privileges incorrectly, allowing a user to gain elevated access.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-50570? CVE-2026-50570 has a CVSS score of 8.5 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of github.com/fission/fission are affected by CVE-2026-50570? github.com/fission/fission (go) versions <= 1.24.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-50570? Yes. CVE-2026-50570 is fixed in 1.25.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-50570 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-50570 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-50570 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-50570? Upgrade github.com/fission/fission to 1.25.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in github.com/fission/fission

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.