openEuler iSulad up to 2.1.6 OCI Image Loader oci_load.c format string
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.9 | $0-$5k | 0.00+ |
Summary
A vulnerability classified as very critical has been found in openEuler iSulad up to 2.1.6. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file src/daemon/modules/image/oci/oci_load.c of the component OCI Image Loader. The manipulation leads to format string. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2026-111434. The attack must be carried out locally. There is no available exploit.
Details
A vulnerability was found in openEuler iSulad up to 2.1.6 and classified as very critical. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file src/daemon/modules/image/oci/oci_load.c of the component OCI Image Loader. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a format string vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-134. The product uses a function that accepts a format string as an argument, but the format string originates from an external source. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Use of Externally-Controlled format string vulnerability in openEuler iSulad on Linux. This vulnerability is associated with program file src/daemon/modules/image/oci/oci_load.c. This issue affects iSulad: through 2.1.6. When the iSulad daemon performs container lifecycle operations (such as create, start, exec, stop, etc.) through the isula runtime (shim), the daemon reads the stderr output of the shim process via a pipe for error information display. If the buffer contains format specifiers such as %s, %x, or %n, it may trigger a format string vulnerability, potentially leading to information leakage, denial of service, or the risk of arbitrary writes.
The advisory is shared at atomgit.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2026-111434 since 10/16/2026. The exploitation is known to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. Additional levels of successful authentication are necessary for exploitation. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 11/12/2026).
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.9VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.9
VulDB Base Score: 8.2
VulDB Temp Score: 8.2
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 5.6
CNA Vector (openEuler): 🔒
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Format stringCWE: CWE-134 / CWE-119
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: No
Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔒
Timeline
10/16/2026 CVE reserved11/12/2026 Advisory disclosed
11/12/2026 VulDB entry created
11/12/2026 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Advisory: atomgit.comStatus: Confirmed
CNA: openEuler
CVE: CVE-2026-111434 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-111434
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-436253
Entry
Created: 11/12/2026 05:12Changes: 11/12/2026 05:12 (64)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.