https://db.gcve.eu Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Sat, 24 Oct 2026 14:58:07 +0000 https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-98988 <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>namespace: keep covered mounts covered in OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE</p> <p>open_tree(OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE) creates a new mount namespace from a copy of the tree at the given path. The caller needs to be privileged over its current user namespace because the new mount namespace will be owned by it. It doesn&#39;t need to be privileged over the mount namespace the tree is copied from. An unprivileged user just needs to create a user namespace first.</p> <p>The copy follows the rules of a detached bind mount. Without AT_RECURSIVE only the mount itself is cloned and its children are left out. With AT_RECURSIVE unbindable mounts are skipped. Both is fine when the caller has privileges over the source mount namespace because it could unmount those mounts anyway. Not so for an unprivileged user in that mount namespace. For them a mount namespace copy is what unshare() does. copy_mnt_ns() copies everything including unbindable mounts and lock_mnt_tree() makes sure nothing can be unmounted in the copy. Nothing that was covered gets revealed.</p> <p>create_new_namespace() only does the locking and so the covered content is right there in the new mount namespace:</p> <p># mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn; mkdir /tmp/otn/covered # echo hidden &gt; /tmp/otn/covered/under.txt # mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn/covered</p> <p>uid 1000, after unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER): fd = open_tree(AT_FDCWD, &#34;/tmp/otn&#34;, OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE); setns(fd, CLONE_NEWNS); open(&#34;/cover…</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>namespace: keep covered mounts covered in OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE</p> <p>open_tree(OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE) creates a new mount namespace from a copy of the tree at the given path. The caller needs to be privileged over its current user namespace because the new mount namespace will be owned by it. It doesn&#39;t need to be privileged over the mount namespace the tree is copied from. An unprivileged user just needs to create a user namespace first.</p> <p>The copy follows the rules of a detached bind mount. Without AT_RECURSIVE only the mount itself is cloned and its children are left out. With AT_RECURSIVE unbindable mounts are skipped. Both is fine when the caller has privileges over the source mount namespace because it could unmount those mounts anyway. Not so for an unprivileged user in that mount namespace. For them a mount namespace copy is what unshare() does. copy_mnt_ns() copies everything including unbindable mounts and lock_mnt_tree() makes sure nothing can be unmounted in the copy. Nothing that was covered gets revealed.</p> <p>create_new_namespace() only does the locking and so the covered content is right there in the new mount namespace:</p> <p># mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn; mkdir /tmp/otn/covered # echo hidden &gt; /tmp/otn/covered/under.txt # mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn/covered</p> <p>uid 1000, after unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER): fd = open_tree(AT_FDCWD, &#34;/tmp/otn&#34;, OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE); setns(fd, CLONE_NEWNS); open(&#34;/cover…</p> https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-98988 https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-6v5x-qw46-2jph <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>namespace: keep covered mounts covered in OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE</p> <p>open_tree(OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE) creates a new mount namespace from a copy of the tree at the given path. The caller needs to be privileged over its current user namespace because the new mount namespace will be owned by it. It doesn&#39;t need to be privileged over the mount namespace the tree is copied from. An unprivileged user just needs to create a user namespace first.</p> <p>The copy follows the rules of a detached bind mount. Without AT_RECURSIVE only the mount itself is cloned and its children are left out. With AT_RECURSIVE unbindable mounts are skipped. Both is fine when the caller has privileges over the source mount namespace because it could unmount those mounts anyway. Not so for an unprivileged user in that mount namespace. For them a mount namespace copy is what unshare() does. copy_mnt_ns() copies everything including unbindable mounts and lock_mnt_tree() makes sure nothing can be unmounted in the copy. Nothing that was covered gets revealed.</p> <p>create_new_namespace() only does the locking and so the covered content is right there in the new mount namespace:</p> <p># mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn; mkdir /tmp/otn/covered # echo hidden &gt; /tmp/otn/covered/under.txt # mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn/covered</p> <p>uid 1000, after unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER): fd = open_tree(AT_FDCWD, &#34;/tmp/otn&#34;, OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE); setns(fd, CLONE_NEWNS); open(&#34;/cover…</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>namespace: keep covered mounts covered in OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE</p> <p>open_tree(OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE) creates a new mount namespace from a copy of the tree at the given path. The caller needs to be privileged over its current user namespace because the new mount namespace will be owned by it. It doesn&#39;t need to be privileged over the mount namespace the tree is copied from. An unprivileged user just needs to create a user namespace first.</p> <p>The copy follows the rules of a detached bind mount. Without AT_RECURSIVE only the mount itself is cloned and its children are left out. With AT_RECURSIVE unbindable mounts are skipped. Both is fine when the caller has privileges over the source mount namespace because it could unmount those mounts anyway. Not so for an unprivileged user in that mount namespace. For them a mount namespace copy is what unshare() does. copy_mnt_ns() copies everything including unbindable mounts and lock_mnt_tree() makes sure nothing can be unmounted in the copy. Nothing that was covered gets revealed.</p> <p>create_new_namespace() only does the locking and so the covered content is right there in the new mount namespace:</p> <p># mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn; mkdir /tmp/otn/covered # echo hidden &gt; /tmp/otn/covered/under.txt # mount -t tmpfs none /tmp/otn/covered</p> <p>uid 1000, after unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER): fd = open_tree(AT_FDCWD, &#34;/tmp/otn&#34;, OPEN_TREE_NAMESPACE); setns(fd, CLONE_NEWNS); open(&#34;/cover…</p> https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-6v5x-qw46-2jph