Container Security Assessment

It evaluates container images and their runtime for security weaknesses — vulnerable image layers, insecure build steps, over-permissive runtime settings, container escape, and secrets exposure — measured against the CIS Docker Benchmark, NIST SP 800-190, and the OWASP Docker Top 10, with each finding proven and rated.

The CIS Docker Benchmark and the CIS Benchmark for the container runtime for configuration hardening, NIST SP 800-190 for the application-container threat model, and the OWASP Docker Top 10 for the common risk categories.

To review images we need to pull them from your registry or receive exported tarballs. For runtime and escape testing we need a host that runs the container runtime, or an assumed-breach foothold inside a container. We agree the scope and anything to avoid before we begin.

Both, and they answer different questions. Image analysis finds vulnerable layers, secrets, and insecure build choices; runtime testing finds what those images are actually allowed to do on the host. A scope can be image-only when that is all you need, but the two together give the real picture.

Container escape is when a process breaks out of its container to the host — usually through a privileged flag, an added capability, a host mount, or a mounted Docker socket. It matters because it turns one compromised container into control of the host and every other container on it, and a plain vulnerability scan does not see it.

Yes. We check daemon and socket exposure — a docker.sock mounted into a container is effectively host root — and the registry: authentication, whether images are signed and their provenance verified, and whether pull policies allow untrusted images.

Image analysis and configuration review are read-only and safe. Active tests — escape attempts — are agreed in advance and run carefully; we prefer a staging environment that mirrors production, and when we must test production we set limits and keep a contact on your side to pause at once if anything looks wrong.

Each finding gets a CVSS score for a common baseline, adjusted by the real impact in your environment — what an attacker reaches, how easily, and whether it leads to the host or to sensitive data. That is why two issues with the same CVSS can be prioritized differently.

Yes — after you remediate, we re-test the reported findings to confirm each fix holds and did not open a new gap. Duration depends on the number of images and the runtime complexity; a typical assessment runs about one to three weeks, and we give a firm estimate after scoping.