Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
HIGH severity

GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf bentoml

HIGH

GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf is a high-severity (CVSS 7.8) Code Injection vulnerability in bentoml. A fix is available for bentoml — see the affected versions and patch details below.

BentoML has Dockerfile Command Injection via system_packages in bentofile.yaml

Also known asCVE-2026-33744PYSEC-2026-157
Published
Mar 26, 2026
Updated
Jun 8, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 19, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

  • CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
  • A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs18th percentile — riskier than 18% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 377,238 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍bentoml

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

Description

Summary

The docker.system_packages field in bentofile.yaml accepts arbitrary strings that are interpolated directly into Dockerfile RUN commands without sanitization. Since system_packages is semantically a list of OS package names (data), users do not expect values to be interpreted as shell commands. A malicious bentofile.yaml achieves arbitrary command execution during bentoml containerize / docker build.

Affected Component

  • src/_bentoml_sdk/images.py:85-89.format(packages=" ".join(packages)) into shell command
  • src/bentoml/_internal/container/frontend/dockerfile/templates/base_debian.j2:13{{ __options__system_packages | join(' ') }}
  • src/bentoml/_internal/bento/build_config.py:174 — No validation on system_packages
  • All distro install commands in src/bentoml/_internal/container/frontend/dockerfile/__init__.py

Affected Versions

All versions supporting docker.system_packages in bentofile.yaml, confirmed on 1.4.36.

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create a project directory with:

service.py:

import bentoml

@bentoml.service
class MyService:
    @bentoml.api
    def predict(self) -> str:
        return "hello"

bentofile.yaml:

service: "service:MyService"
docker:
  system_packages:
    - "curl && id > /tmp/bentoml-pwned #"
  1. Run:
bentoml build
  1. Examine the generated Dockerfile at ~/bentoml/bentos/my_service/<tag>/env/docker/Dockerfile. Line 41 will contain:
RUN apt-get install -q -y -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef curl && id > /tmp/bentoml-pwned #
  1. Running bentoml containerize my_service:<tag> will execute id > /tmp/bentoml-pwned as root during the Docker build.

Root Cause

The system_packages field values are treated as package names (data) by the user but are string-formatted directly into shell commands in the Dockerfile:

# images.py:85-89
self.commands.append(
    CONTAINER_METADATA[self.distro]["install_command"].format(
        packages=" ".join(packages)  # No escaping
    )
)

Where install_command is "apt-get install -q -y -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef {packages}".

A bash_quote filter (wrapping shlex.quote) exists in the codebase and is registered in both Jinja2 environments, but it is only applied to environment variable values, never to system_packages.

Impact

  1. Malicious repositories: An attacker publishes an ML project with a crafted bentofile.yaml. Anyone who clones and builds it gets arbitrary code execution during docker build.
  2. CI/CD compromise: Automated pipelines running bentoml containerize on PRs that modify bentofile.yaml are vulnerable.
  3. BentoCloud: If BentoCloud builds images from user-supplied bentofile.yaml, this could achieve RCE on cloud infrastructure.
  4. Supply chain: Shared bentos or model repos in the BentoML ecosystem can contain malicious configs.

Suggested Fix

Option 1: Input validation (recommended)

Add a regex validator to system_packages in build_config.py:

import re

VALID_PACKAGE_NAME = re.compile(r'^[a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9.+\-_:]*$')

def _validate_system_packages(instance, attribute, value):
    if value is None:
        return
    for pkg in value:
        if not VALID_PACKAGE_NAME.match(pkg):
            raise BentoMLException(
                f"Invalid system package name: {pkg!r}. "
                "Package names may only contain alphanumeric characters, "
                "dots, plus signs, hyphens, underscores, and colons."
            )

system_packages: t.Optional[t.List[str]] = attr.field(
    default=None, validator=_validate_system_packages
)

Option 2: Output escaping

Apply shlex.quote() to each package name before interpolation in images.py:system_packages() and apply the bash_quote Jinja2 filter in base_debian.j2.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIbentomlall versions1.4.37pip install --upgrade 'bentoml==1.4.37'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for bentoml, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update bentoml to 1.4.37 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf 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 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary The `docker.system_packages` field in `bentofile.yaml` accepts arbitrary strings that are interpolated directly into Dockerfile `RUN` commands without sanitization. Since `system_packages` is semantically a list of OS package names (data), users do not expect values to be interpreted as shell commands. A malicious `bentofile.yaml` achieves arbitrary command execution during `bentoml containerize` / `docker build`. ## Affected Component - `src/_bentoml_sdk/images.py:85-89` — `.format(packages=" ".join(packages))` into shell command - `src/bentoml/_internal/container/frontend/docke
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-jfjg-vc52-wqvf: bentoml RCE (High 7.8) | O3 Security