Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-25621

Linuxfoundation Containerd ≤ 1.7.29

Published
06 November 2025
Modified
31 December 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0016 5th percentile
Risk Priority 51 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-25621 is a high-severity Incorrect Execution-Assigned Permissions (CWE-279) vulnerability in Linuxfoundation Containerd. Its CVSS base score is 7.3 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique File and Directory Permissions Modification (T1222); ranked at the 5th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

containerd is an open-source container runtime. Versions 0.1.0 through 1.7.28, 2.0.0-beta.0 through 2.0.6, 2.1.0-beta.0 through 2.1.4 and 2.2.0-beta.0 through 2.2.0-rc.1 have an overly broad default permission vulnerability. Directory paths `/var/lib/containerd`, `/run/containerd/io.containerd.grpc.v1.cri` and `/run/containerd/io.containerd.sandbox.controller.v1.shim` were all created with incorrect permissions. This…

more

issue is fixed in versions 1.7.29, 2.0.7, 2.1.5 and 2.2.0. Workarounds include updating system administrator permissions so the host can manually chmod the directories to not have group or world accessible permissions, or to run containerd in rootless mode.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1222 File and Directory Permissions Modification Defense Impairment
Adversaries may modify file or directory permissions/attributes to evade access control lists (ACLs) and access protected files.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-47291Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2025-47290Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2023-25173Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2026-46680Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2026-53492Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2026-47262Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2023-25153Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2026-53488Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2025-64329Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd
CVE-2026-53489Same product: Linuxfoundation Containerd

Affected Assets

linuxfoundation
containerd
2.2.0 · ≤ 1.7.29 · 2.0.0 — 2.0.7 · 2.1.0 — 2.1.5

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 2 hardening rules · 1 OS baseline
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Enforcing approved authorizations structurally stops the runtime assignment of permissions that violate user intent.

Requiring least privilege limits the permissions the executing code is allowed to assign.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.AA-05 mostly match
prevents

Enforcing policy-defined permissions and least privilege directly prevents runtime permission mis-assignments.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Hardened configuration baselines and change control reduce the chance of incorrect permission settings during execution.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

mitigates

Restricting privileged utility programs reduces the chance that such tools will incorrectly alter object permissions.

degrades

Privileged access rights management directly constrains the permissions a process may assign at runtime.

prevents

Secure coding practices can prevent the coding error that leads to incorrect permission assignment.

degrades

Information access restriction policies limit the permissions that executing code can grant or modify.

detects

Change-management procedures can catch permission-setting mistakes before they reach production.

References