Cri OApplication · Kubernetes
CVE-2019-14891
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA flaw was found in cri-o, as a result of all pod-related processes being placed in the same memory cgroup. This can result in container management (conmon) processes being killed if a workload process triggers an out-of-memory (OOM) condition for the cgroup. An attacker could abuse this flaw to get host network access on an cri-o host.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceIn cri-o, all pod-related processes are placed in the same memory cgroup, meaning container management (conmon) processes share the cgroup with workload processes. If a workload triggers an out-of-memory (OOM) condition, the kernel kills processes in that cgroup—including critical conmon processes. An attacker can exploit this to kill conmon and potentially gain host network access.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Cri OApplication
< 1.16.1
FedoraOperating system
all versions
Openshift Container PlatformApplication
= 3.11= 4.1= 4.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify cri-o versionRun `crio --version` or check the installed package version using your system's package manager (e.g., `rpm -q cri-o` or `dpkg -l cri-o`)Affected if The installed version is below 1.16.1
-
Verify cri-o is the active container runtimeCheck your Kubernetes node configuration: run `kubectl get nodes -o wide` and inspect the container runtime endpoint, or check kubelet configuration for `--container-runtime-endpoint` pointing to cri-oAffected if Kubernetes is configured to use cri-o as the container runtime
-
Check for cgroup v2 isolation configurationIf using cgroup v2, examine the memory controller configuration: look at `/sys/fs/cgroup/memory/<cgroup_path>/memory.oom.group` and verify whether conmon processes are in a separate cgroup from workload processesAffected if The cgroup configuration does not isolate pod processes (conmon) from workload processes in separate memory cgroups, allowing OOM in workload to affect conmon
You are affected if cri-o version is below 1.16.1 AND your container runtime is cri-o AND conmon processes share a memory cgroup with workload processes (no cgroup isolation).
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor data1.16.1
Isolate pod processes into separate memory cgroups from conmon processes, or implement cgroup-level protections to ensure critical container management processes are not killed during OOM conditions.
Fix this in Cri O
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation20.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-14891 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-14891 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data