dbcve.org
Openshift Container PlatformApplication · Redhat

CVE-2026-10533

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-01
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
56/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
A flaw was found in OpenShift Container Platform. Completed pods with restartPolicy: Never do not count toward ResourceQuota pod limits, and Kubernetes events are not quota-scoped. A non-privileged user who can create pods in a namespace can exploit this to generate a large volume of events that accumulate in etcd, causing API server performance degradation across the cluster.

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 confidence

Completed pods with restartPolicy: Never do not count toward ResourceQuota pod limits in OpenShift Container Platform, and Kubernetes events are not quota-scoped. An authenticated user who can create pods can exploit this by generating completed pods that leave events accumulating in etcd, causing API server performance degradation across the cluster.

MitigationImplement ResourceQuota policies that account for completed pods or configure event retention policies to limit event accumulation; also consider upgrading to an OpenShift version that addresses this quota-scoped event handling.

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
Openshift Container PlatformApplication
Affected:= 4.0

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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
Low

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

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify completed pods with restartPolicy: Never
    Run: kubectl get pods --all-namespaces -o jsonpath='{range .items[?(@.spec.restartPolicy=="Never")]}{.metadata.namespace}{"\t"}{.metadata.name}{"\t"}{.status.phase}{"\n"}{end}' - Look for pods in Completed status
    Affected if The namespace contains pods with restartPolicy: Never that have reached Completed status and are not being cleaned up
  2. Check if ResourceQuota with pod limits exists in the namespace
    Run: kubectl get resourcequota -o jsonpath='{range .items[?(@.spec.hard.pods)]}{.metadata.name}{"\t"}{.spec.hard.pods}{"\n"}{end}' - Also check: kubectl describe resourcequota
    Affected if No ResourceQuota resource exists in the namespace, or the quota does not include pod limits, allowing unlimited pod creation including those with restartPolicy: Never
  3. Verify events are accumulating in the namespace
    Run: kubectl get events --sort-by='.lastTimestamp' | head -20 and count total events: kubectl get events --no-headers | wc -l. Compare event counts between namespaces or over time.
    Affected if The namespace shows abnormally high event counts relative to other namespaces, or events remain in Completed status for pods with restartPolicy: Never indicating unbounded accumulation
  4. Confirm user can create pods in the namespace
    Run: kubectl auth can-i create pods --namespace=<target-namespace> as the non-privileged user in question
    Affected if The user has permission to create pods in the namespace, enabling them to trigger the event accumulation vector described in the CVE

A user is affected if they have pods with restartPolicy: Never in Completed status in a namespace where ResourceQuota does not properly limit pods, and excessive events are accumulating in etcd.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement ResourceQuota policies that account for completed pods or configure event retention policies to limit event accumulation; also consider upgrading to an OpenShift version that addresses this quota-scoped event handling.

Fix this in Openshift Container Platform Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10533 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-10533 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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