CVE-2022-31030 | containerd CRI plugin: Host memory exhaustion through ExecSync

containerd is an open source container runtime. A bug was found in the containerd's CRI implementation where programs inside a container can cause the containerd daemon to consume memory without bound during invocation of the `ExecSync` API. This can cause containerd to consume all available memory on the computer, denying service to other legitimate workloads. Kubernetes and crictl can both be configured to use containerd's CRI implementation; `ExecSync` may be used when running probes or when executing processes via an "exec" facility. This bug has been fixed in containerd 1.6.6 and 1.5.13. Users should update to these versions to resolve the issue. Users unable to upgrade should ensure that only trusted images and commands are used.

Published: 2022-06-09 Last update: 2026-06-17 Assigner: [email protected] Source: [email protected]
NVD Status：Modified，CVE State: published
View at NVD, CVE.org, EUVD

CVE-2022-31030 is rated Low Risk (32.4/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.38%). Monitor for updates and reassess as exploit intelligence or EPSS changes.

Risk is dynamic; we continuously reassess and refresh what is shown on this page as upstream context changes.

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2022-31030

EPSS lead: Daily EPSS estimates relative likelihood of exploitation; percentile ranks this CVE among scored vulnerabilities (higher = more severe relative rank).

# Date Old EPSS score New EPSS score Delta (New - Old)
1 2026-06-15 0.16% 0.38% +0.22%
2 2025-12-24 0.11% 0.16% +0.05%
3 2025-12-05 — 0.11% —

Full EPSS history (10 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2022-31030

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
 1.8 3.6 [email protected]
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
 1.8 3.6 [email protected]
2.1 2.0 LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P Click to expand
Access vector (AV:L)
Requires local access to the target system.
Access complexity (AC:L)
Exploitation conditions are straightforward and predictable.
Authentication (AU:N)
No authentication is required.
Confidentiality impact (C:N)
No confidentiality impact.
Integrity impact (I:N)
No integrity impact.
Availability impact (A:P)
Partial availability impact.
 3.9 2.9 [email protected]

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2022-31030

GitHub Security Advisory for CVE-2022-31030

GHSA-5ffw-gxpp-mxpf · Severity: medium · Ecosystem: go — containerd CRI plugin: Host memory exhaustion through ExecSync

OS Trackers for CVE-2022-31030

vendor priority summary link
alpine — CVE-2022-31030: 1 source package rows (containerd); 34 state rows across 7 repos (3.17-community, 3.18-community, 3.19-community, 3.20-community, 3.21-community, 3.22-community, edge-community); fixed 8, open 26. https://security.alpinelinux.org/vuln/CVE-2022-31030
debian not yet assigned CVE-2022-31030 not yet assigned priority: Debian including 1 source packages (containerd), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2022-31030
gentoo normal CVE-2022-31030: 1 GLSA(s) (202401-31), 1 atom(s) (app-containers/containerd); latest impact normal. https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=CVE-2022-31030
ubuntu medium CVE-2022-31030 medium priority: Ubuntu including 1 source packages (containerd), 7 status rows across 7 suites (bionic, focal, impish, jammy, kinetic, upstream, xenial): released 6, ignored 1. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2022-31030

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2022-31030

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linuxfoundation containerd < 1.5.13 cpe:2.3:a:linuxfoundation:containerd:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linuxfoundation containerd >= 1.6.0, < 1.6.6 cpe:2.3:a:linuxfoundation:containerd:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
debian debian_linux 11.0 cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux:11.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
fedoraproject fedora 35 cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora:35:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
fedoraproject fedora 36 cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora:36:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2022-31030

cvelogic Threat Intelligence