CVE-2026-17527VulnerabilityPublished 2 Sep 2026Updated 2 Nov 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: OpenShift Virtualization v4.14 Images

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-17527· High 7.7

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High.

Data as of 2 Nov 2026, 17:31 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Jul 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 2 Nov 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.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.14	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.16	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.18	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.19	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.20	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.21	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Until a fix is available, cluster administrators should avoid granting the cdi.kubevirt.io:view ClusterRole or the built-in Kubernetes view role via cluster-wide ClusterRoleBindings. Instead, use namespace-scoped RoleBindings to limit the scope of these permissions. Additionally, audit namespaces to identify identities that have both view-equivalent access and separate edit or admin access, as this combination enables cross-namespace data exfiltration. Follow Red Hat's guidance on applying updates and monitor the vendor advisory for patch releases.

Description

CVE-2026-17527 is a vulnerability in Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization v4.14 related to the containerized-data-importer (CDI) component. The aggregated cdi.kubevirt.io:view ClusterRole grants create permission on the datavolumes/source subresource, which allows users with this view role combined with write access in any namespace to clone and exfiltrate the contents of any PersistentVolumeClaim (PVC) across namespaces. This bypasses namespace isolation and the intended read-only guarantee of the view role. The issue affects all downstream consumers using CDI's default aggregated RBAC roles, including OpenShift Virtualization. No fix is currently available, and mitigation involves restricting cluster-wide ClusterRoleBindings of the view role and auditing namespace permissions.

Impact

The vulnerability allows unauthorized data exfiltration across namespaces in a Kubernetes cluster using OpenShift Virtualization. Specifically, it enables a user or service account with the view role cluster-wide and write access in any namespace to clone the contents of any PersistentVolumeClaim (PVC) in the cluster. This bypasses namespace isolation and the read-only access guarantees, potentially exposing sensitive data stored in PVCs to unauthorized parties. The impact is high confidentiality loss without affecting integrity or availability.

CWE-639Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #24OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Architecture and Design
For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
Architecture and Design
Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V4.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (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 2 Nov 2026, 17:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats