BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-61711High confidence

BuildKit: Custom frontend could bypass Seccomp/AppArmor

moby · buildkit

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-7236-3392-C5C6 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

5.3MediumCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 154 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • EPSS is 0.36% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs moby buildkit and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 154 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Open-source package ranges2 source-attributed ranges

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
Gogithub.com/moby/buildkitSEMVER: introduced 0; fixed 0.31.10.31.1OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026
gogithub.com/moby/buildkit<= 0.31.00.31.1GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 19 Aug 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

2 current
CVE-2026-61711 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 5 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2026-61711
7 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 16.0
  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 16.1
  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0
  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.1
  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Micro 6.0
  • buildkit as component of SUSE Linux Micro 6.1
  • buildkit as component of openSUSE Leap 16.0
Summary
BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.
Remediation
No remediation text is recorded.
CVE-2026-61711 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitygithub.com/moby/buildkit: BuildKit: Security bypass allows disabling container protections
147 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • assisted/agent-preinstall-image-builder-rhel9 as a component of Assisted Installer for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 2
  • rhai/assisted-installer-controller-rhel9 as a component of Assisted Installer for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 2
  • compliance/openshift-compliance-must-gather-rhel8 as a component of Compliance Operator
  • build-of-trustee/trustee-must-gather-rhel9 as a component of Confidential Compute Attestation
  • openshift-sandboxed-containers/osc-must-gather-rhel9 as a component of Confidential Compute Attestation
  • openshift-sandboxed-containers/osc-podvm-builder-rhel9 as a component of Confidential Compute Attestation
  • kmm/kernel-module-management-must-gather-rhel9 as a component of Kernel Module Management Operator for Red Hat Openshift
  • openshift-logging/cluster-logging-rhel9-operator as a component of Logging Subsystem for Red Hat OpenShift
  • lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel8 as a component of Logical Volume Manager Storage
  • lvms4/lvms-must-gather-rhel9 as a component of Logical Volume Manager Storage
  • mta/mta-cli-rhel9 as a component of Migration Toolkit for Applications 8
  • mta/mta-discovery-addon-rhel9 as a component of Migration Toolkit for Applications 8
Summary
A flaw was found in BuildKit. A custom frontend could craft a build request with an invalid security mode, leading to the disabling of Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container. This bypasses the intended sandbox mechanisms, potentially allowing for broader impact within the container, even though Linux capabilities remained restricted.
Remediation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-62838

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
5.3 · CVSS 4.0
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 154 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.

What

BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.

Why

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.

Why

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Input Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-20 ↗

CWE-20: Improper Input Validation. The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCLowVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VILowVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VALowVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkCWE-20
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-62838Official EUVD mapping

BuildKit is a toolkit for converting source code to build artifacts in an efficient, expressive and repeatable manner. Prior to 0.31.1, a custom frontend could place an invalid SecurityMode value in a crafted build request, and executor/oci/spec_linux.go treated the unsupported value as a non-sandbox mode without requiring the security.insecure entitlement. This disabled Seccomp and AppArmor protections for the build container even though Linux capabilities remained restricted. This issue is fixed in version 0.31.1.

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-2111docker: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in docker ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen oder Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260826Security Bulletin 26 Aug 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 26 Aug 2026, published on 26 August 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
0.31.1.
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 19 Aug 2026 · Last source change 20 Aug 2026, 13:19 UTC · CWE-20 · Improper Input Validation

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-23
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-62838
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
  2. Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added remediation: github.com/GHSA-7236-3392-c5c6; removed remediation: github.com/3ea6dd0ce7d269cdb8aa23348718e2c1bf64f109.
    Before
    remediation: github.com/3ea6dd0ce7d269cdb8aa23348718e2c1bf64f109
    After
    remediation: github.com/GHSA-7236-3392-c5c6
    CNA ↗
  3. CVSS scoreCVSS vector changed while the displayed base score remained 5.3.
    Before
    5.3 (CVSS 4.0 · CNA · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X)
    After
    5.3 (CVSS 4.0 · CNA · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N)
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-62838↗Vendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team↗CVE authority or vendor reference · GitHub GHSA-7236-3392-C5C6↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-61711 · cve.blacktree.nl