CVE-2025-4953VulnerabilityPublished 16 Sep 2025Updated 21 Oct 2026

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

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2025-4953· High 7.4

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High · fixed in 4.13.62 : patch Red Hat soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS base score

7.4High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.13.62

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 2026-10-26.

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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC 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.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red HatRed Hat Enterprise Linux 8	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.12	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.12	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.14	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.16	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.16	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.17	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.18	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.18	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Enterprise Linux 10	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Enterprise Linux 9	Affected–	Fixed in–
GitHubpodman`pkg:github/podman`Other threats	Affected =0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Red Hat advises all OpenShift Container Platform 4.13 users to upgrade to version 4.13.62, which contains the fixes for these vulnerabilities. Upgrades can be performed using the OpenShift CLI (oc) or the web console following the official upgrade documentation. No additional mitigation actions are specified or required beyond applying this update.

Description

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is Red Hat's cloud computing Kubernetes application platform solution designed for on-premise or private cloud deployments. This advisory contains the container images for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13.62. See the following advisory for the RPM packages for this release: https://access.redhat.com/errata/156645 Space precludes documenting all of the container images in this advisory. See the following Release Notes documentation, which will be updated shortly for this release, for details about these changes: https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/openshift_container_platform/4.13/html/release_notes Security Fix(es): None 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. All OpenShift Container Platform 4.13 users are advised to upgrade to these release channel. To check for available updates, use the OpenShift CLI (oc) or web console. Instructions for upgrading a cluster are available at https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/openshift_container_platform/4.13/html-single/updating_clusters/index#updating-cluster-within-minor.

Impact

The vulnerabilities fixed in this update include container escape risks, out-of-bounds memory reads, and denial of service conditions affecting container runtime components such as runc, podman, and libssh. These issues could allow an attacker to escape container isolation or cause service disruption. However, Red Hat rates the overall security impact of this update as low. There are no known exploits in the wild at the time of this advisory.

Summary

This advisory covers Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13.62, which includes fixes for multiple security vulnerabilities identified by CVE-2025-4953, CVE-2025-5318, CVE-2025-31133, CVE-2025-52565, and CVE-2025-52881. The vulnerabilities involve issues such as podman build context bind mount, libssh out-of-bounds read, and several container escape vulnerabilities in runc due to mount race conditions, malicious config, and arbitrary write gadgets. The update is a container image and package release for OpenShift 4.13 users, with instructions to upgrade via OpenShift CLI or web console. Red Hat Product Security rates the update's security impact as low. The advisory does not provide CVSS scores but references CVE pages for details. The affected versions are OpenShift Container Platform 4.13 prior to 4.13.62.

CWE-378Creation of Temporary File With Insecure Permissions (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
Opening temporary files without appropriate measures or controls can leave the file, its contents and any function that it impacts vulnerable to attack.
Requirements
Many contemporary languages have functions which properly handle this condition. Older C temp file functions are especially susceptible.
Implementation
Ensure that you use proper file permissions. This can be achieved by using a safe temp file function. Temporary files should be writable and readable only by the process that owns the file.
Implementation
Randomize temporary file names. This can also be achieved by using a safe temp-file function. This will ensure that temporary files will not be created in predictable places.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-59Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product attempts to access a file based on the filename, but it does not properly prevent that filename from identifying a link or shortcut that resolves to an unintended resource.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Symlink Attack (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (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, 22:22 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-378, CWE-125, CWE-59 +1

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats