CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-9640NVD status: Analyzed

LXD: Incorrect Authorization

CVE-2026-9640 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in LXD from Canonical, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with administrator privileges, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 5.21.5, 5.0.7, 6.9 as the first without the flaw, so updating LXD to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.63% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 51% of scored CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update LXD to 5.21.5 or 5.0.7 or 6.9, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
CanonicalLXD5.21.0 up to, but not including, 5.21.5; 5.0.0 up to, but not including, 5.0.7; 6.0 up to, but not including, 6.95.21.5, 5.0.7, 6.9

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
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
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
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (ubuntu.com).

Official description

A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in LXD from 6.0 before 6.9, 5.21.0 before 5.21.5, and 5.0.0 before 5.0.7 regarding the handling of project-restriction policies during snapshot restoration.. An authenticated project operator in a restricted multi-tenant environment can bypass policy restrictions by importing a maliciously crafted instance backup containing restricted configuration keys within a snapshot. When the snapshot is restored, these restricted keys are applied to the live instance without policy validation. Starting the modified instance grants the operator unauthorized host root access.

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.

More Incorrect Authorization vulnerabilities (CWE-863)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in LXD

All LXD vulnerabilities

Recent Incorrect Authorization vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.