Количество 22
Количество 22
CVE-2026-43472
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs->p...
CVE-2026-43472
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs->p...
CVE-2026-43472
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs-
CVE-2026-43472
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: u ...
GHSA-vgv8-2mh4-qh7r
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->...
BDU:2026-15625
Уязвимость функции unshare_fs() модуля kernel/fork.c ядра операционной системы Linux, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании
ROS-20261012-80-0077
Уязвимость kernel-lt
ROS-20261012-73-0076
Уязвимость kernel-lt
SUSE-SU-2026:2914-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel
SUSE-SU-2026:2800-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel
SUSE-SU-2026:2799-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel
ALT-PU-2026-6748
ALT-PU-2026-6748: package `kernel-image-un-def` update to version 6.1.167-alt1
ALT-PU-2026-7359
ALT-PU-2026-7359: package `kernel-image-std-def` update to version 5.10.253-alt1
ALT-PU-2026-7109
ALT-PU-2026-7109: package `kernel-image-rt` update to version 5.10.254-alt1.rt150
ALT-PU-2026-6772
ALT-PU-2026-6772: package `kernel-image-pine` update to version 6.18.19-alt1
ELSA-2026-50372
ELSA-2026-50372: Unbreakable Enterprise kernel security update (IMPORTANT)
openSUSE-SU-2026:21555-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel
ALT-PU-2026-4865
ALT-PU-2026-4865: package `kernel-image-6.18` update to version 6.18.19-alt1
ALT-PU-2026-6044
ALT-PU-2026-6044: package `kernel-image-rpi-un` update to version 6.12.79-alt1
ALT-PU-2026-7006
ALT-PU-2026-7006: package `kernel-image-6.12` update to version 6.12.85-alt1
Уязвимостей на страницу
Уязвимость | CVSS | EPSS | Опубликовано | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2026-43472 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs->p... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад | |
CVE-2026-43472 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs->p... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад | |
CVE-2026-43472 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->fs- | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад | |
CVE-2026-43472 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: u ... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад | |
GHSA-vgv8-2mh4-qh7r In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: unshare: fix unshare_fs() handling There's an unpleasant corner case in unshare(2), when we have a CLONE_NEWNS in flags and current->fs hadn't been shared at all; in that case copy_mnt_ns() gets passed current->fs instead of a private copy, which causes interesting warts in proof of correctness] > I guess if private means fs->users == 1, the condition could still be true. Unfortunately, it's worse than just a convoluted proof of correctness. Consider the case when we have CLONE_NEWCGROUP in addition to CLONE_NEWNS (and current->fs->users == 1). We pass current->fs to copy_mnt_ns(), all right. Suppose it succeeds and flips current->fs->{pwd,root} to corresponding locations in the new namespace. Now we proceed to copy_cgroup_ns(), which fails (e.g. with -ENOMEM). We call put_mnt_ns() on the namespace created by copy_mnt_ns(), it's destroyed and its mount tree is dissolved, but... current->fs->root and current->... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад | |
BDU:2026-15625 Уязвимость функции unshare_fs() модуля kernel/fork.c ядра операционной системы Linux, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 8 месяцев назад | |
ROS-20261012-80-0077 Уязвимость kernel-lt | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 14 дней назад | |
ROS-20261012-73-0076 Уязвимость kernel-lt | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 14 дней назад | |
SUSE-SU-2026:2914-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | 3 месяца назад | |||
SUSE-SU-2026:2800-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | 4 месяца назад | |||
SUSE-SU-2026:2799-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | 4 месяца назад | |||
ALT-PU-2026-6748 ALT-PU-2026-6748: package `kernel-image-un-def` update to version 6.1.167-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 7 месяцев назад | ||
ALT-PU-2026-7359 ALT-PU-2026-7359: package `kernel-image-std-def` update to version 5.10.253-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 6 месяцев назад | ||
ALT-PU-2026-7109 ALT-PU-2026-7109: package `kernel-image-rt` update to version 5.10.254-alt1.rt150 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 6 месяцев назад | ||
ALT-PU-2026-6772 ALT-PU-2026-6772: package `kernel-image-pine` update to version 6.18.19-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 7 месяцев назад | ||
ELSA-2026-50372 ELSA-2026-50372: Unbreakable Enterprise kernel security update (IMPORTANT) | 4 месяца назад | |||
openSUSE-SU-2026:21555-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | 2 месяца назад | |||
ALT-PU-2026-4865 ALT-PU-2026-4865: package `kernel-image-6.18` update to version 6.18.19-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 7 месяцев назад | ||
ALT-PU-2026-6044 ALT-PU-2026-6044: package `kernel-image-rpi-un` update to version 6.12.79-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 7 месяцев назад | ||
ALT-PU-2026-7006 ALT-PU-2026-7006: package `kernel-image-6.12` update to version 6.12.85-alt1 | CVSS3: 9.8 | 6 месяцев назад |
Уязвимостей на страницу