Vulnerability Database

346,508

Total vulnerabilities in the database

OCI Manifest Type Confusion Issue — github.com/docker/distribution

Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion')

Impact

Systems that rely on digest equivalence for image attestations may be vulnerable to type confusion.

Patches

Upgrade to at least v2.8.0-beta.1 if you are running v2.x release. If you use the code from the main branch, update at least to the commit after b59a6f827947f9e0e67df0cfb571046de4733586.

Workarounds

There is no way to work around this issue without patching.

References

Due to an oversight in the OCI Image Specification that removed the embedded mediaType field from manifests, a maliciously crafted OCI Container Image can cause registry clients to parse the same image in two different ways without modifying the image’s digest by modifying the Content-Type header returned by a registry. This can invalidate a common pattern of relying on container image digests for equivalence.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Unknown
  • Score:
  • AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.