CVE-2025-57852
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 container privilege escalation flaw was found in KServe ModelMesh container images. This issue stems from the /etc/passwd file being created with group-writable permissions during build time. In certain conditions, an attacker who can execute commands within an affected container, even as a non-root user, can leverage their membership in the root group to modify the /etc/passwd file. This could allow the attacker to add a new user with any arbitrary UID, including UID 0, leading to full root privileges within the container.
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 · high confidenceKServe ModelMesh container images have a privilege escalation flaw where /etc/passwd is created with group-writable permissions during build. A non-root user belonging to the root group can modify /etc/passwd to add a new user with UID 0, achieving root privileges within the container.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 KServe ModelMesh containerCheck if the container is running KServe ModelMesh by inspecting the image name, labels, or running processes related to modelmesh. Commands: `cat /proc/1/cgroup` or `ls -la /var/lib/modelmesh` if accessible.Affected if The container is a KServe ModelMesh image and was built with the vulnerable configuration.
-
Inspect /etc/passwd permissionsRun `ls -la /etc/passwd` to check file permissions. Look for group-write bit in the permissions string (e.g., -rw-rw-r-- indicates group-writable).Affected if The permissions show a 'w' in the group permission field (fourth character), meaning group-writable (mode like 644 or 664 instead of 644 with strict group).
-
Check current user group membershipRun `id` or `groups` to see which groups the current user belongs to. Specifically check if GID 0 (root group) is listed.Affected if The current user belongs to the root group (GID 0) or has write access to /etc/passwd through group permissions.
-
Verify /etc/passwd writabilityAttempt to verify write access: `test -w /etc/passwd && echo writable` or attempt a non-destructive write test as the current user.Affected if The current user can write to /etc/passwd due to group-writable permissions.
A user is affected if they are running a KServe ModelMesh container where /etc/passwd has group-writable permissions and the user has root group membership or write access to that file.
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 dataRebuild the container images with corrected /etc/passwd permissions (remove group-writable bit) and redeploy. This is a build-time fix requiring image regeneration and distribution to affected environments.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-57852 — 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-2025-57852 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