How severe is GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w?

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w has a CVSS score of 7.3/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w?

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w affects the following packages: github.com/containerd/containerd (Go), github.com/containerd/containerd/v2 (Go), github.com/containerd/containerd/v2 (Go), github.com/containerd/containerd/v2 (Go). Ecosystems affected: Go.

How do I fix GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w?

Update github.com/containerd/containerd to 1.7.29 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w in my Go dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

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.

Is GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w?

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.2%, placing it in the 6th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w?

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w is classified as CWE-279 (CWE-279). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w was published on November 6, 2025 and was last updated on September 10, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐹

🐹 Go

Not in CISA KEV

HIGH severity

containerd affected by a local privilege escalation via wide permissions on CRI directoryGHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w

HIGHFix: containerd/containerd@7c59e8e

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w is a high-severity (CVSS 7.3) CWE-279 vulnerability in github.com/containerd/containerd. A fix is available for github.com/containerd/containerd — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2024-25621GO-2025-4100

Published

Nov 6, 2025

Updated

Sep 10, 2026

Affected

4 pkgs

Patched

4 / 4

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Nov 10, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs6th percentile — riskier than 6% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

4 pkgs affected

🐹github.com/containerd/containerd🐹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

An overly broad default permission vulnerability was found in containerd.

/var/lib/containerd was created with the permission bits 0o711, while it should be created with 0o700
- Allowed local users on the host to potentially access the metadata store and the content store
/run/containerd/io.containerd.grpc.v1.cri was created with 0o755, while it should be created with 0o700
- Allowed local users on the host to potentially access the contents of Kubernetes local volumes. The contents of volumes might include setuid binaries, which could allow a local user on the host to elevate privileges on the host.
/run/containerd/io.containerd.sandbox.controller.v1.shim was created with 0o711, while it should be created with 0o700

The directory paths may differ depending on the daemon configuration. When the temp directory path is specified in the daemon configuration, that directory was also created with 0o711, while it should be created with 0o700.

Patches

This bug has been fixed in the following containerd versions:

2.2.0
2.1.5
2.0.7
1.7.29

Users should update to these versions to resolve the issue. These updates automatically change the permissions of the existing directories.

[!NOTE]

/run/containerd and /run/containerd/io.containerd.runtime.v2.task are still created with 0o711. This is an expected behavior for supporting userns-remapped containers.

Workarounds

The system administrator on the host can manually chmod the directories to not have group or world accessible permisisons:

chmod 700 /var/lib/containerd
chmod 700 /run/containerd/io.containerd.grpc.v1.cri
chmod 700 /run/containerd/io.containerd.sandbox.controller.v1.shim

An alternative mitigation would be to run containerd in rootless mode.

Credits

The containerd project would like to thank David Leadbeater 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:

Open an issue in containerd
Email us at [email protected]

To report a security issue in containerd:

Report a new vulnerability

Affected Packages

4 total 4 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐹Go	`github.com/containerd/containerd`	all versions	1.7.29`go get github.com/containerd/containerd@v1.7.29`
🐹Go	`github.com/containerd/containerd/v2`	all versions	2.0.7`go get github.com/containerd/containerd/v2@v2.0.7`
🐹Go	`github.com/containerd/containerd/v2`	≥ 2.1.0-beta.0&&< 2.1.5	2.1.5`go get github.com/containerd/containerd/v2@v2.1.5`
🐹Go	`github.com/containerd/containerd/v2`	≥ 2.2.0-beta.0&&< 2.2.0	2.2.0`go get github.com/containerd/containerd/v2@v2.2.0`

Affected Products

1 product · 8 configurations

Application

containerdlinuxfoundation

≥ 2.1.0 && < 2.1.5

1 version

2.2.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/containerd/containerd, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update github.com/containerd/containerd to 1.7.29 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatImportant

Workaround published by Red Hat

The system administrator on the host can manually chmod the directories to not have group or world accessible permissions: ``` chmod 700 /var/lib/containerd chmod 700 /run/containerd/io.containerd.grpc.v1.cri chmod 700 /run/containerd/io.containerd.sandbox.controller.v1.shim ``` An alternative mitigation would be to run containerd in rootless mode.

Source: Red Hat security advisory for GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w (CC BY 4.0)

Product	Fixed in	Advisory
Multicluster Global Hub 1.4.9	`multicluster-globalhub/multicluster-globalhub-agent-rhel9:1.4.3-1765591609`	RHSA-2025:23644
Multicluster Global Hub 1.5.8	`multicluster-globalhub/multicluster-globalhub-agent-rhel9:1.5.2-1765591231`	RHSA-2025:23428
Network Observability (NETOBSERV) 1.11.0	`network-observability/network-observability-cli-rhel9:1771226060`	RHSA-2026:2900
OpenShift API for Data Protection 1.3	`oadp/oadp-mustgather-rhel9:1785177359`	RHSA-2026:51033
OpenShift API for Data Protection 1.5	`oadp/oadp-mustgather-rhel9:1768627772`	RHSA-2026:2343
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.14	`rhacm2/submariner-rhel9-operator:1780204322`	RHSA-2026:25127
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security 4.7	`advanced-cluster-security/rhacs-central-db-rhel8:4.7`	RHSA-2025:23248
Red Hat OpenShift AI 2.16	`rhoai/odh-model-controller-rhel8:1774286327`	RHSA-2026:5807

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact An overly broad default permission vulnerability was found in containerd. - `/var/lib/containerd` was created with the permission bits 0o711, while it should be created with 0o700 - Allowed local users on the host to potentially access the metadata store and the content store - `/run/containerd/io.containerd.grpc.v1.cri` was created with 0o755, while it should be created with 0o700 - Allowed local users on the host to potentially access the contents of Kubernetes local volumes. The contents of volumes might include setuid binaries, which could allow a local user on the host to

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w in your dependencies?

Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works

CVSS Score

7.3/10CVSS v3 base

Vector breakdown

Attack Vector

Local

Attack Complexity

Low

Privileges Required

Low

User Interaction

Required

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

High

Raw vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWE Classification

CWE-279CWE-279

Weaponization

No Nuclei template, Metasploit module or public proof-of-concept found.

OpenSSF Scorecard

Package health score

containerd

9.3/10

Maintained10/10

Code-Review10/10

Branch-Protection8/10

Assessed Nov 9, 2026

Timeline

Disclosed

Nov 6, 2025

Last updated

Sep 10, 2026

Identifiers

GHSA-pwhc-rpq9-4c8w

GO-2025-4100

References

Advisorynvd.nist.gov · CVE 2024 25621 Webgithub.com · GHSA pwhc rpq9 4c8w Webgithub.com · 7c59e8e9e970d38061a77b586b23655c352bfec5 Webgithub.com · rootless.md Packagegithub.com · containerd

Related vulnerabilities

This CVE is high severity; 3 of 8 other CVEs affecting containerd are rated as high or higher (top: high).

CVE-2026-95838CVE-2026-53493CVE-2026-53495CVE-2026-47262CVE-2026-53488CVE-2026-46680CVE-2025-64329CVE-2024-25621

Provenance

Sources

OSV.devNVDFIRST.org (EPSS)

Last verifiedSep 10, 2026