That is why we should get rid of setuid binaries. GrapheneOS does not use them and was therefore not affected. On the desktop there is also a project called Secureblue based on Fedora Atomic that is moving in a similar direction and has already eliminated a large number though not all setuid binaries. As an alternative to sudo, su, and pkexec there is for example run0, which is available in distributions using system…
No, it is not affected by the exploit as presented. This is a page cache write, so writing to a binary that root will run later can work too. This isn’t a reason to push an agenda that dislikes setuid binaries.
Copy Fail
431–440 of 545 posts
Re: Copy Fail
#432It seems there was some kind of confusion during the disclosure process, because the vendors aren't treating this vulnerability as serious and it remains unpatched in many distros. https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2026-31431 "Moderate severity", "Fix deferred" https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-31431 https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-31431 https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-3143…
Re: Copy Fail
#433As soon as I read this >Shared dev boxes, shell-as-a-service, jump hosts, build servers — anywhere multiple users share a kernel. any user becomes root jumped out of bed and went straight into webminal.org servers as local user and ran the python code. It says permission denied on sock() call. Then I tested with local laptop with it: ``` $ uname -a Linux debian 6.12.43+deb12-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.4…
Re: Copy Fail
#434Note that in kubernetes, setting `allowPrivilegeEscalation` to false (which you should be doing already, it's in the Pod Security Standards Restricted profile) mitigates this.
> the primary mitigation is still patching the node kernel; user namespaces are blast-radius reduction, not a complete mitigation for this path
Re: Copy Fail
#435Is there a readable version of the exploit readily available by any chance? Gotta admit that I failed binary-zip-interpretation-with-naked-eye class twice
Slightly more readable Python version at https://gist.github.com/grenkoca/b82281a4706e936072979acf54b...
Re: Copy Fail
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the better argument to ask whether there'd be benefit if all those things did? A lack of adoption isn't apriori a good argument against an interface, and serious bugs can happen anywhere. My personal opinion for a while has been that crypto operations should be in the kernel so we can end the madness that is every application shipping it's own crypto and trust system which has only gotten worse since containers…
> My personal opinion for a while has been that crypto operations should be in the kernel so we can end the madness that is every application shipping it's own crypto and trust system which has only gotten worse since containers were invented. There’s a valid argument here but I think that’d devolve into the DNSSec trap without both a very well-designed API and a stable way to ship updates for older kernels. If peopl…
But the Chrome example also highlights the problem: Chrome might ship it, but vanishingly little software is ever going to upgrade and we've got an explosion of statically linked languages now.
Re: Copy Fail
#437It seems there was some kind of confusion during the disclosure process, because the vendors aren't treating this vulnerability as serious and it remains unpatched in many distros. https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2026-31431 "Moderate severity", "Fix deferred" https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-31431 https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-31431 https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-3143…
It's not good... and surely not "responsible/planned" disclosure.
Re: Copy Fail
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosure timeline 2026-03-23Reported to Linux kernel security team 2026-03-24Initial acknowledgment 2026-03-25Patches proposed and reviewed 2026-04-01Patch committed to mainline 2026-04-22CVE-2026-31431 assigned 2026-04-29Public disclosure (https://copy.fail/) kernel 6.19.14-arch1-1, the kernel in question from the parent comment, has been patched.
The lesson here being... compile your own kernel from git sources every few days? Give up entirely on non-virtualized container security? This is not sarcasm. I'd finally given in and started learning about docker/podman-style OCI containerization last week.
Re: Copy Fail
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
hmm have i missed anything?
Any program on your computer can just run "sudo" to escalate itself.
Re: Copy Fail
#440Tested on almalinux8/9
https://gist.github.com/42wim/2e3cc3c92333e4c2730541e6f0e038...
YMMV