[nickjj]

> You could access the containers at 106.12.52.111 if you were in the same network (e.g. 106.12.52.0/24) and the packets did not have to traverse a router.

Ok thanks, that's sort of what I thought (you had to be on the same network) but I wasn't 100% on that because networking has a lot of rabbit holes.

Your gist is very well written and a great find but based on the scope of the vulnerability this wouldn't be classified as a catastrophic event right?

If it's only limited to the attacker and the Docker host being on the same network while packets never go through a router then it's not an issue for the common case of someone hosting their web app or service on a VPS somewhere on the internet and have used 127.0.0.1:XXXX:XXXX to publish a port (perhaps their web app is published to localhost so nginx running directly on the Docker host can reverse proxy it -- this is what I've done for years now).