Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹 Go

GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc

GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc is a Improper Input Validation vulnerability in github.com/containerd/containerd/v2. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

containerd CRI checkpoint restore CDI annotation smuggling

Also known asCVE-2026-53492GO-2026-5064
Published
Jun 19, 2026
Updated
Jun 25, 2026
Affected
3 pkgs
Patched
3 / 3
Exploits
None indexed

Blast Radius

3 pkgs affected
🐹github.com/containerd/containerd/v2🐹github.com/containerd/containerd/v2🐹github.com/containerd/containerd/v2

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Impact

containerd's CRI implementation improperly trusts Container Device Interface (CDI) annotations found within untrusted checkpoint image metadata during container restoration. When restoring a container from a checkpoint, containerd preserves CDI-related annotations from the checkpoint archive rather than relying solely on the pod's create-time specification. This allows a user with pod creation permissions to bypass standard Kubernetes resource allocation and device plugin enforcement, injecting arbitrary CDI edits (such as device nodes and host mounts) into the restored container. Successful exploitation requires that the node has CDI enabled and contains a matching host CDI specification for the requested device; environments where CDI is disabled or lacking sensitive device specifications are not affected.

Patches

This bug has been fixed in the following containerd versions:

  • 2.3.2
  • 2.2.5
  • 2.1.9

Users should update to these versions to resolve the issue. Recreating existing containers restored from untrusted checkpoints may be necessary to remove smuggled configuration.

Workarounds

Users can mitigate this issue by restricting the restoration of containers from untrusted checkpoint images. If Container Device Interface (CDI) capabilities are not utilized on the node, removing or temporarily relocating host CDI specifications from the default directories (/etc/cdi and /var/run/cdi) will eliminate the reachability of this vulnerability.

Credits

The containerd project would like to thank Robert Prast (@robertprast) for responsibly disclosing this issue in accordance with the containerd security policy.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

To report a security issue in containerd:

Affected Packages

3 total 3 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/containerd/containerd/v22.1.0&&< 2.1.92.1.9
🐹Gogithub.com/containerd/containerd/v22.2.0&&< 2.2.52.2.5
🐹Gogithub.com/containerd/containerd/v22.3.0&&< 2.3.22.3.2

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/containerd/containerd/v2. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/containerd/containerd/v2 to 2.1.9 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact containerd's CRI implementation improperly trusts Container Device Interface (CDI) annotations found within untrusted checkpoint image metadata during container restoration. When restoring a container from a checkpoint, containerd preserves CDI-related annotations from the checkpoint archive rather than relying solely on the pod's create-time specification. This allows a user with pod creation permissions to bypass standard Kubernetes resource allocation and device plugin enforcement, injecting arbitrary CDI edits (such as device nodes and host mounts) into the restored container.
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-33vj-92qq-66hc across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.