Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tested exploit/linux/local/runc_cwd_priv_esc on arch linux runc 1.1.4 #19679

Open
rolf-d2i opened this issue Nov 25, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Tested exploit/linux/local/runc_cwd_priv_esc on arch linux runc 1.1.4 #19679

rolf-d2i opened this issue Nov 25, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
suggestion-docs New documentation suggestions

Comments

@rolf-d2i
Copy link

Summary

Tested exploit/linux/local/runc_cwd_priv_esc on arch linux to extend access with docker runc exploit.
Running Linux runc version 1.1.4 the exploit did not complete with success.

The exploit claims this system should have been vulnerable, but actual execution on host shows the exploit did not complete with success on arch linux. The Documentation on the exploit should be updated to document this, it is either is a bug, or arch linux is not vulnerable to this exploit, or the documentation is insufficient to correctly replicate the vulnerability.

Git link to exploit code tested https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/blob/master/modules/exploits/linux/local/runc_cwd_priv_esc.rb

@rolf-d2i rolf-d2i added the suggestion-docs New documentation suggestions label Nov 25, 2024
@oddlittlebird
Copy link
Contributor

Metasploit folx, if someone can provide this technical writer a little guidance on what needs updating, then I'd be happy to update this for you.

@h00die
Copy link
Contributor

h00die commented Dec 12, 2024

Arch linux is not directly supported (or tested) by the module (although it may still work). https://security.archlinux.org/issues/vulnerable does not list cve-2024-21626 (although there's nothing from 2024, so likely the list isn't kept up to date).
Do you have any more information about what version of the runc package was tested and on what version of arch? What was the output of the module? What FILEDESCRIPTOR numbers were attempted? Are you sure the system is vulnerable?

There is a issue template for bugs, I would suggest following that as I'd like more information before expanding the module.

@h00die
Copy link
Contributor

h00die commented Dec 12, 2024

Metasploit folx, if someone can provide this technical writer a little guidance on what needs updating, then I'd be happy to update this for you.

I believe we chatted in slack, if this is incorrect please let me know.

@rolf-d2i
Copy link
Author

Archlinux uses rolling updates and does not have versions, the system was update using pacman to the date I reported except runc that used the version specified. The runc version used should have made the system vulnerable as stated in the exploit description.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
suggestion-docs New documentation suggestions
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants