Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-32955

LPE

Published
21 April 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 6.0
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0022 12th percentile
Risk Priority 44 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-32955 is a medium-severity Privilege Chaining (CWE-268) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 6.0 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism (T1548); ranked at the 12th 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-2 (Account Management) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Harden-Runner is a CI/CD security agent that works like an EDR for GitHub Actions runners. Versions from 0.12.0 to before 2.12.0 are vulnerable to `disable-sudo` bypass. Harden-Runner includes a policy option `disable-sudo` to prevent the GitHub Actions runner user from…

more

using sudo. This is implemented by removing the runner user from the sudoers file. However, this control can be bypassed as the runner user, being part of the docker group, can interact with the Docker daemon to launch privileged containers or access the host filesystem. This allows the attacker to regain root access or restore the sudoers file, effectively bypassing the restriction. This issue has been patched in version 2.12.0.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1134 Access Token Manipulation Stealth
Adversaries may modify access tokens to operate under a different user or system security context to perform actions and bypass access controls.
T1548.001 Setuid and Setgid Privilege Escalation
An adversary may abuse configurations where an application has the setuid or setgid bits set in order to get code running in a different (and possibly more privileged) user’s context.
T1548.003 Sudo and Sudo Caching Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may perform sudo caching and/or use the sudoers file to elevate privileges.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1078 Valid Accounts Stealth
Adversaries may obtain and abuse credentials of existing accounts as a means of gaining Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-20194Shared CWE-268, CWE-269
CVE-2026-67356Shared CWE-269
CVE-2023-0959Shared CWE-269
CVE-2023-30622Shared CWE-269
CVE-2025-6994Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-36046Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-27826Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-40861Shared CWE-269
CVE-2026-29121Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-38775Shared CWE-269

Affected Assets

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 11 hardening rules · 7 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Account management directly governs assignment and tracking of privileges so proper implementation stops the weakness from being introduced.

Requiring explicit access-control decisions ensures privileges are evaluated rather than assumed or omitted.

Access enforcement can apply rules that block unsafe privilege combinations at runtime.

Separation of duties directly blocks assignment of privilege combinations that enable unsafe actions.

Least privilege reduces the set of privileges available for dangerous chaining.

Binding security attributes to subjects/objects supplies the mechanism needed to track and enforce privileges correctly.

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

Least-privilege policy definition and enforcement directly limits unsafe privilege combinations while the control also addresses broader policy lifecycle activities.

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

PR.AA-01 supplies credential/identity lifecycle support that can reduce some privilege-assignment errors but does not itself assign, modify, or check privileges, leaving most of CWE-269's risk unaddressed.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Config baselines and default reviews can enforce some privilege-related settings (one facet) but do not address code-level assignment/tracking logic that defines CWE-269.

PR.PS-05 partial match
prevents

PR.PS-05 can partially limit exploitability of some privilege issues via execution restrictions, but does not address the core design/implementation flaws of CWE-269 at all.

PR.DS-10 none match
prevents

PR.DS-10 protects data-in-use without touching privilege assignment/tracking, so it neither prevents CWE-269 nor removes more than one narrow facet of its risk.

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.

prevents

Requiring owner approval, segregation of duties, and periodic reviews prevents the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges to users or processes.

prevents

Segregation of duties reduces the chance that two distinct privileges can be combined to perform unsafe actions.

prevents

Restricting privileged access rights directly mitigates the risk of privilege chaining.

prevents

Dynamic techniques that grant the minimum necessary rights for a given time window and revoke them afterward reduce the window in which excessive or unnecessary privileges can be exploited.

prevents

Access control policies can limit the combination of privileges that enable unsafe actions.

prevents

Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Ubuntu 22.04 (1 rule)
  • V-260559 Ubuntu 22.04 LTS must ensure only users who need access to security functions are part of sudo group. prevents CWE-268
Ubuntu 24.04 (1 rule)
  • V-270748 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS must ensure only users who need access to security functions are part of sudo group. prevents CWE-268
Windows 10 (1 rule)
  • V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-268, CWE-269
Windows 11 (1 rule)
  • V-253269 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
  • V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-268, CWE-269
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
  • V-205746 Windows Server 2019 must only allow Administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-268, CWE-269
Windows Server 2022 (1 rule)
  • V-254428 Windows Server 2022 must only allow administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-268, CWE-269

References