Summary
Sysctls applied to containers with host IPC or host network namespaces can affect the host
Workarounds
Users can set manage_ns_lifecycle to false, which causes the sysctls to be configured by the OCI runtime, which typically filter these cases. This option is available in 1.20 and 1.19. Newer versions don't have this option.
An admission webhook could also be created to deny pods that use host IPC or network namespaces and also attempt to configure sysctls related to that namespace.
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:
- Open an issue in the CRI-O repo
- To make a report, email your vulnerability to the private
[email protected] list
with the security details and the details expected for all CRI-O bug
reports.
Impact
Before setting the sysctls for a pod, the pods namespaces must be unshared (created). However, in cases where the pod is using a host network or IPC namespace, a bug in CRI-O caused the namespace creating tool pinns to configure the sysctls of the host. This allows a malicious user to set sysctls on the host, assuming they have access to hostNetwork and hostIPC.
Any CRI-O cluster after CRI-O 1.18 that drops the infra container
1.22 and 1.23 clusters drop infra container by default, and are thus vulnerable by default.
Affected versions
Security releases
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
CRI-O versions 1.24.0, 1.23.1, 1.22.2, 1.21.5, 1.20.6, 1.19.5 all have the patches.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X? GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X is a medium-severity security vulnerability in github.com/cri-o/cri-o (go), affecting versions >= 1.23.0, < 1.23.1. It is fixed in 1.23.1, 1.22.2, 1.21.5, 1.20.6, 1.19.5.
- Which versions of github.com/cri-o/cri-o are affected by GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X? github.com/cri-o/cri-o (go) versions >= 1.23.0, < 1.23.1 is affected.
- Is there a fix for GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X? Yes. GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X is fixed in 1.23.1, 1.22.2, 1.21.5, 1.20.6, 1.19.5. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X 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
- What actually determines whether GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X 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.
- How do I fix GHSA-W2J5-3RCX-VX7X?
- Upgrade
github.com/cri-o/cri-oto 1.23.1 or later - Upgrade
github.com/cri-o/cri-oto 1.22.2 or later - Upgrade
github.com/cri-o/cri-oto 1.21.5 or later - Upgrade
github.com/cri-o/cri-oto 1.20.6 or later - Upgrade
github.com/cri-o/cri-oto 1.19.5 or later
- Upgrade