Skip to main content
← Vulnerabilities

LXC: lxc-copy host-context hostname update follows symlink

6.8MediumCNA
Exploited
No known exploitation
Fix
No fix listed
Who is exposed
Not reported
Published
Last modified
12/100 · provisional
None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub

Summary

LXC, a Linux container management tool, is affected through its lxc-copy command and liblxc clone() API when root clones a container from an untrusted or less trusted source root filesystem. A local attacker who can get root to perform that clone, with user interaction and without LXC_CLONE_KEEPNAME, can use a symlink to make the hostname update overwrite and truncate an existing file outside the destination root filesystem.

Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.

Read the original description

LXC is a userspace interface for the Linux kernel containment features used to create and manage system containers. In LXC 7.0.0 and earlier, lxc-copy and the public liblxc clone() API can follow attacker-controlled symbolic links while updating /etc/hostname in a copied container root filesystem. The affected surfaces are lxc-copy and liblxc's public lxc_container::clone() API. The privileged cloning process must run as root. The source rootfs must be attacker-controlled or less trusted. A symlink can be placed at etc/hostname or in an intermediate component. The clone operation preserves the symlink before updating the hostname. The vulnerable write truncates and overwrites an existing file outside the destination rootfs. When root clones an untrusted container without LXC_CLONE_KEEPNAME, the copied symlink can resolve outside the destination rootfs and cause the privileged process to overwrite an existing host file with the destination container name. Unprivileged use and managers with independent cloning implementations are not affected. LXC_CLONE_KEEPNAME avoids the hostname update and therefore the affected write.

cve.now Index

12Pcve.now Index 12 of 100 · methodology v3 · provisional
  • Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
  • Exposure?/25Unknown. No advisory context yet
  • Reach?/20Unknown. No tracked technology or package matched
  • Severity6.8/10CVSS 6.8
  • No patch5/5No patch listed yet

What would change the score

  • Would score about 67 if added to CISA KEV
  • Would score about 62 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
  • Would score about 34 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed

Timeline

  1. CVE published
  2. First seen by cve.now

Affected versions

  • lxc lxc

    through 7.0.0

Evidence 3

  1. Advisory
  2. Repository
  3. Repository

Corrections

None so far.

Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.

Questions about CVE-2026-100395

Is CVE-2026-100395 being exploited?

It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data

Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-100395?

lxc: through 7.0.0.Source: cve.now feed data