CVE-2026-40711
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 · uneditedDell Dell Container Storage Modules, version(s) csi-powerstore v2.16.0, csi-unity v2.16.0, csi-powerflex v2.16.0, csi-powermax v2.16.0, contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Command execution.
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 confidenceDell Container Storage Modules (csi-powerstore, csi-unity, csi-powerflex, csi-powermax) version 2.16.0 contain an OS Command Injection vulnerability where improper neutralization of special elements in OS commands allows a high-privileged attacker with remote access to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying system.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/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 installed Dell CSI driversRun 'kubectl get pods -A | grep -i csi' or 'oc get pods -A | grep -i csi' to list all Dell CSI driver pods in the clusterAffected if Any of these driver names appear: csi-powerstore, csi-unity, csi-powerflex, csi-powermax
-
Check driver versionRun 'kubectl get pod <driver-pod-name> -n <namespace> -o jsonpath={.spec.containers[].image}' to get the container image, then extract the version from the image tagAffected if The image tag shows version 2.16.0 exactly
-
Confirm driver deployment namespaceRun 'kubectl get all -A | grep -E "(powerstore|unity|powerflex|powermax)"' to identify the namespace where the Dell CSI driver is deployedAffected if The driver is deployed in any namespace (all namespaces are equally affected if version is 2.16.0)
-
Verify CSI driver service is accessibleCheck for exposed services: run 'kubectl get svc -A | grep -E "(powerstore|unity|powerflex|powermax)"' and review network policies with 'kubectl get networkpolicies -A'Affected if The CSI driver endpoint has network access from non-trusted sources or the service is exposed externally
You are affected if any Dell CSI driver (csi-powerstore, csi-unity, csi-powerflex, or csi-powermax) is running at version 2.16.0 and is network-accessible to a high-privileged attacker.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of the affected Dell Container Storage Modules as provided by Dell. If no patch is immediately available, restrict network access to the CSI driver endpoints and limit privileges of service accounts to the minimum required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40711 — 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-2026-40711 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