competition-kernel-container-escape

Analyzes container isolation boundaries and proves kernel-level escape primitives in CTF sandbox environments.

7|4|Updated Jun 22, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/dbx0/skills --skill competition-kernel-container-escape-dbx0
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: competition-kernel-container-escape
Source: https://github.com/dbx0/skills/tree/main/skills/cloud-container/privilege-escalation/competition-kernel-container-escape
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/dbx0/skills --skill competition-kernel-container-escape-dbx0

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? In CTF sandbox challenges, proving a real container-to-host escape requires more than triggering a crash or gaining container root. This Skill provides a structured methodology for mapping kernel and container isolation, separating exploit prerequisites from primitives, and capturing decisive evidence that a boundary crossing actually occurred. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Isolation Mapping: Records namespaces, cgroups, seccomp profiles, capabilities, LSM state, mounts, and runtime sockets tied to exact node context. - Primitive Verification: Distinguishes crash-only behavior from stable capability gain by capturing before/after identity, namespace, and mount state. - Escape Chain Reduction: Compresses findings into a minimal prerequisite-to-primitive-to-boundary-crossing chain with root cause classification (kernel vulnerability, runtime misconfiguration, capability overgrant, or namespace leak). - Use Case: During a kernel pwn CTF challenge, use this Skill after the sandbox orchestrator has established assumptions to verify whether a syscall-triggered primitive actually crosses into host context rather than just crashing the container. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to map the container's namespace, capability, and seccomp state and then prove whether your exploit primitive crosses into the host context.

Frequently Asked Questions about competition-kernel-container-escape

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I prove a container escape in a CTF challenge?

Capture before and after evidence of identity, namespace, mount, or process visibility changes triggered by your exploit primitive. Container root alone is not proof; you must show a stable host-relevant capability gained from the boundary crossing.

What isolation layers should I map before attempting kernel exploitation?

Record the namespace map, cgroup mode, capability set, seccomp profile, AppArmor or SELinux state, mounted filesystems, and runtime sockets. Also note kernel version, distro build hints, and module exposure to identify reachable syscall surface.

When should this skill be used in a CTF workflow?

Use it only after the ctf-sandbox-orchestrator has established sandbox assumptions, node ownership, and evidence priorities. It is a downstream specialization for the decisive step of proving a container-to-host boundary crossing.

Why is a kernel crash not enough to claim a container escape?

Crash artifacts only show the primitive triggered, not that a boundary was crossed. A valid escape claim requires stable capability gain, such as changed identity, host filesystem visibility, or privileged actions reproducible from a reset baseline.

What are common pitfalls in container escape verification?

Common mistakes include treating container root as host compromise, mixing multiple primitives before proving one decisive chain, and claiming escape from crash-only behavior. Keep instrumented observations separate from the pristine challenge path.