CVE-2024-24785VulnerabilityPublished 26 Feb 2026Updated 30 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: container-tools:rhel8 security update

Affects Red Hat container-tools:rhel8Source GCVE Database

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited : upgrade Red Hat container-tools:rhel8 to 8.10.0 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 08:00 UTC

Severity

High

Rated by Threat Radar · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 56% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 8.10.0

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

microsoft-security-response-ce

What to do

Upgrade Red Hat container-tools:rhel8 to 8.10.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected >=8.0.0 <8.10.0 >=8.10.0 <=8.10.0 Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 8) src aardvark-dns-2:1.10.1-2.module+el8.10.0+23963+b64d8032.src::container-tools:rhel8 Microsoft Azure Linux 2.0 CBL Mariner 2.0 3.0 containers-common-2:1-82.module+el8.10.0+23963+b64d8032.src::container-tools:rhel8 x86_64 runc-4:1.2.9-3.module+el8.10.0+23963+b64d8032.x86_64::container-tools:rhel8	Fixed in 8.10.0

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated packages for the container-tools module in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 that address these vulnerabilities. Users should apply the security update as detailed in the Red Hat advisory RHSA-2026:3428 and the referenced article https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258. No additional mitigation steps are indicated beyond applying the official update.

Description

The container-tools module contains tools for working with containers, notably podman, buildah, skopeo, and runc. Security Fix(es): * golang: html/template: errors returned from MarshalJSON methods may break template escaping (CVE-2024-24785) * crypto/x509: golang: Denial of Service due to excessive resource consumption via crafted certificate (CVE-2025-61729) * github.com/sirupsen/logrus: github.com/sirupsen/logrus: Denial-of-Service due to large single-line payload (CVE-2025-65637) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

CWE-74Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component (Injection) (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command, data structure, or record using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify how it is parsed or interpreted when it is sent to a downstream component.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Requirements
Programming languages and supporting technologies might be chosen which are not subject to these issues.
Implementation
Utilize an appropriate mix of allowlist and denylist parsing to filter control-plane syntax from all input.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Request Splitting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Double Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1050Excessive Platform Resource Consumption within a Loop (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product has a loop body or loop condition that contains a control element that directly or indirectly consumes platform resources, e.g. messaging, sessions, locks, or file descriptors.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-400Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place.
Architecture and Design
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or; uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Regular Expression Exponential Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Sustained Client Engagement (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Aug 2026, 21:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-74, CWE-1050, CWE-400

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats