CVE Tools

CVE-2026-19730

Podman: podman: quadlet install --replace non-truncating write retains removed host-access directives

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 5th percentile. Only a workaround so far.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

No fixed build is published yet. The vendor describes a workaround.

What it is

From the CVE record

The 'podman quadlet install --replace' command opens the existing destination file with O_CREATE|O_WRONLY but omits O_TRUNC. When the initial reflink copy attempt fails (common on non-reflink-capable filesystems including many RHEL default XFS configurations), the fallback in ReflinkOrCopy uses io.Copy which performs a non-truncating write. If the original Quadlet is larger than the new Quadlet, the file is not truncated and content from the original is preserved. The command completes with no warning. There is no risk of information leakage as the user already had access to the Quadlet in order to replace it, and in most cases, this would only lead to invalid Quadlet files. However, security-related options from the end of the old Quadlet could be included in the new Quadlet, and if the truncation resulted in a valid Quadlet file, this could result in undesirable behavior. For example, running podman quadlet install --replace to remove a single line from the end of a Quadlet - including security-sensitive content, like AddCapability - will fail, and the option will continue to be used. Further, with Volume Quadlets, this can include additional mounts which can cause content to be unintentionally exposed into containers. If, later, the image is updated then compromised content might be leaked to an attacker. The vulnerable code paths are in pkg/domain/infra/abi/quadlet.go (lines 338-360, O_CREATE|O_WRONLY without O_TRUNC) and vendor/go.podman.io/storage/pkg/fileutils/reflink_linux.go (lines 12-19, non-truncating io.Copy fallback).

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS5th
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.2% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 5th percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

10 events over 40 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Workaround availableworkaround available, record updated, record updated
  2. Workaround availablerecord updated
  3. Workaround availablepublished, weakness classified, record updated

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

Scored 4.2 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector LocalRequires local access to the vulnerable system (e.g. local login, malicious file)
  • Attack Complexity HighRequires specific conditions like a race condition or non-default configuration
  • Privileges Required LowRequires basic user-level privileges
  • User Interaction RequiredA user must click a link, open a file, or perform some action

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality LowSome restricted information is disclosed, but limited in scope
  • Integrity LowData modification is possible but limited in scope or consequence
  • Availability LowReduced performance or intermittent disruption of service

Weaknesses

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Red Hat, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store