incus: Incorrect Authorization
CVE-2025-52890 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in incus from Lxc, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.1 out of 10. It can be exploited from the same local network by an attacker with administrator privileges, without any action from a user. Affected incus versions: >= 6.12, <= 6.13. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.23% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of incus you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- AdjacentThe attacker must be on the same local network segment.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- HighAdministrator-level access is required first.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- ChangedThe attack can reach beyond the vulnerable component into other systems.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- NoneNothing can be modified.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:H. Scored by CNA (github.com).
Official description
Incus is a system container and virtual machine manager. When using an ACL on a device connected to a bridge, Incus versions 6.12 and 6.13generates nftables rules that partially bypass security options `security.mac_filtering`, `security.ipv4_filtering` and `security.ipv6_filtering`. This can lead to ARP spoofing on the bridge and to fully spoof another VM/container on the same bridge. Commit 254dfd2483ab8de39b47c2258b7f1cf0759231c8 contains a patch for the issue.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Incorrect Authorization
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in incus
- 9.9 Critical severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 9.9 Critical severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.5 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
Recent Incorrect Authorization vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.