Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
39 Posts 16 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
    wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
    wdormann@infosec.exchange
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

    1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
    2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
    3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

    Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

    zaicurity@infosec.exchangeZ aristot73@infosec.exchangeA wodny@mastodon.socialW lioh@social.anoxinon.deL khleedril@cyberplace.socialK 6 Replies Last reply
    0
    • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

      The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

      1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
      2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
      3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

      Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

      zaicurity@infosec.exchangeZ This user is from outside of this forum
      zaicurity@infosec.exchangeZ This user is from outside of this forum
      zaicurity@infosec.exchange
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      @wdormann this one managed it better imho https://github.security.telekom.com/2026/04/pack2theroot-linux-local-privilege-escalation.html

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

        The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

        1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
        2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
        3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

        Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

        aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
        aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
        aristot73@infosec.exchange
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        @wdormann I pasted your toot in claude asking if the three are somehow related other than by all of them being LPEs.

        Result: "This request triggered restrictions on violative cyber content and was blocked [...] request an adjustment pursuant to our Cyber Verification Program..."

        hmm....

        Link Preview Image
        wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
        1
        0
        • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
        • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

          The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

          1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
          2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
          3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

          Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

          wodny@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
          wodny@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
          wodny@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          @wdormann Dirty Frag and Copy Fail 2 target the same bug, correct?

          mxk@hachyderm.ioM troed@swecyb.comT 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • wodny@mastodon.socialW wodny@mastodon.social

            @wdormann Dirty Frag and Copy Fail 2 target the same bug, correct?

            mxk@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
            mxk@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
            mxk@hachyderm.io
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            @wodny @wdormann yes. They should not be counted as 2 separate vulnerabilities.

            wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

              The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

              1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
              2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
              3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

              Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

              lioh@social.anoxinon.deL This user is from outside of this forum
              lioh@social.anoxinon.deL This user is from outside of this forum
              lioh@social.anoxinon.de
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              @wdormann Dirty Frag: embargo breach has been done by who and how?

              wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

                1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
                2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
                3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

                Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

                khleedril@cyberplace.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                khleedril@cyberplace.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                khleedril@cyberplace.social
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                @wdormann All this proves is that the world is full of bad eggs and you have to look out for yourself by adopting zero-trust.

                It doesn't mean that white hats shouldn't disclose early to distros to give them time to fix, and red hats still need to push back on the black hats.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • lioh@social.anoxinon.deL lioh@social.anoxinon.de

                  @wdormann Dirty Frag: embargo breach has been done by who and how?

                  wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                  wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                  wdormann@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  @Lioh

                  2026-05-07: Detailed information and the exploit for this vulnerability were published publicly by an unrelated third party, breaking the embargo.

                  πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

                  lioh@social.anoxinon.deL ewenmcneill@cloudisland.nzE 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • aristot73@infosec.exchangeA aristot73@infosec.exchange

                    @wdormann I pasted your toot in claude asking if the three are somehow related other than by all of them being LPEs.

                    Result: "This request triggered restrictions on violative cyber content and was blocked [...] request an adjustment pursuant to our Cyber Verification Program..."

                    hmm....

                    Link Preview Image
                    wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wdormann@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    @aristot73
                    See also: https://infosec.exchange/@wdormann/116518216007753330
                    πŸ˜‚

                    aristot73@infosec.exchangeA 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                      @Lioh

                      2026-05-07: Detailed information and the exploit for this vulnerability were published publicly by an unrelated third party, breaking the embargo.

                      πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

                      lioh@social.anoxinon.deL This user is from outside of this forum
                      lioh@social.anoxinon.deL This user is from outside of this forum
                      lioh@social.anoxinon.de
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      @wdormann really would like to see some proof on that.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • mxk@hachyderm.ioM mxk@hachyderm.io

                        @wodny @wdormann yes. They should not be counted as 2 separate vulnerabilities.

                        wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wdormann@infosec.exchange
                        wrote last edited by
                        #11

                        @mxk @wodny
                        Ah right.
                        Dirty frag is https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4c50a4034e62ab75f1d5cdd191dd5f9c77fdff4 and a yet to be committed fix.

                        Copy Fail 2 is also https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4c50a4034e62ab75f1d5cdd191dd5f9c77fdff4

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • wodny@mastodon.socialW wodny@mastodon.social

                          @wdormann Dirty Frag and Copy Fail 2 target the same bug, correct?

                          troed@swecyb.comT This user is from outside of this forum
                          troed@swecyb.comT This user is from outside of this forum
                          troed@swecyb.com
                          wrote last edited by
                          #12

                          @wodny

                          My understanding is that the Copy Fail 2 publication on Github _is_ the "broken embargo" that triggered publication of Dirty Frag.

                          @wdormann

                          wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                            @aristot73
                            See also: https://infosec.exchange/@wdormann/116518216007753330
                            πŸ˜‚

                            aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                            aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                            aristot73@infosec.exchange
                            wrote last edited by
                            #13

                            @wdormann πŸ˜€

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                              The 3 recent Linux LPEs are sort of interesting in that each one took a different path from discovery to disclosure.

                              1. Copy Fail: Publicity stunt where they claim to have done the right thing, yet didn't bother to tell a single distro vendor, and lied about updates being available.
                              2. Dirty Frag: Attempted to do proper coordination, including notifying the linux-distros mailing list. But the embargo was broken, so it was disclosed unexpectedly ahead of time.
                              3. Copy Fail 2: Discovered as an n-day by looking at kernel commit logs and Spender noticing that it was copyfail-class

                              Each path had basically exactly the same outcome (No fixes at publication time). πŸ˜‚

                              wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wdormann@infosec.exchange
                              wrote last edited by
                              #14

                              And just to clarify about "Dirty Frag" vs. "Copy Fail 2":

                              Dirty Frag is TWO vulnerabilities:

                              1. The xfrm-ESP Page-Cache Write vulnerability has been assigned CVE-2026-43284 and patched in mainline at f4c50a4034e6.
                              2. The RxRPC Page-Cache Write vulnerability has been reserved as CVE-2026-43500 for tracking; no patch exists in any tree yet.

                              Copy Fail 2 is a "clean room" rediscovery/exploitation of f4c50a4034e6 (CVE-2026-43284)

                              Since Copy Fail 2 was published to GitHub 1 hour earlier than Dirty Frag was published. The Dirty Frag writeup specifies that the embargo was broken, and as a result TWO vulnerabilities were disclosed.

                              Personally, I think that if you publish a patch for a vulnerability, and then you begin an embargo a week after it was published, that doesn't really count as an "embargo"? πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

                              Fun stuff...

                              Link Preview ImageLink Preview ImageLink Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                              wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • troed@swecyb.comT troed@swecyb.com

                                @wodny

                                My understanding is that the Copy Fail 2 publication on Github _is_ the "broken embargo" that triggered publication of Dirty Frag.

                                @wdormann

                                wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wdormann@infosec.exchange
                                wrote last edited by
                                #15

                                @troed @wodny
                                The irony of this:
                                The Dirty Frag timeline shows that the patch was published a week before the "embargo" was started.

                                And when the "embargo" was broken, Dirty Frag was published, releasing TWO vulnerabilities.

                                How one embargoes something that is essentially public already is a head-scratcher.

                                ferrix@mastodon.onlineF 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                                  @troed @wodny
                                  The irony of this:
                                  The Dirty Frag timeline shows that the patch was published a week before the "embargo" was started.

                                  And when the "embargo" was broken, Dirty Frag was published, releasing TWO vulnerabilities.

                                  How one embargoes something that is essentially public already is a head-scratcher.

                                  ferrix@mastodon.onlineF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  ferrix@mastodon.onlineF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  ferrix@mastodon.online
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #16

                                  @wdormann @troed @wodny there's so much less daylight than I thought between "a serious process for security professionals" and "oops all 0-day LPEs"

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                                    @Lioh

                                    2026-05-07: Detailed information and the exploit for this vulnerability were published publicly by an unrelated third party, breaking the embargo.

                                    πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

                                    ewenmcneill@cloudisland.nzE This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ewenmcneill@cloudisland.nzE This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ewenmcneill@cloudisland.nz
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #17

                                    @wdormann @Lioh I think that refers to the copy fail 2 release, which (from link in top post in this thread, repeated below) seems to be someone who reverse engineered one of the (dirty pipe) bugs from the upstream kernel fix and wrote it up (presumably originally assuming it was already fixed / shipped).

                                    An β€œembargo” with patches in public is… always going to be fragile. (Looks like β€œaccidental duplicate find” here, because of first copy fail.)

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    oss-security - Copy Fail 2 / Dirty Frag β€” n-day from public commit, not embargo break

                                    favicon

                                    (www.openwall.com)

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                                      And just to clarify about "Dirty Frag" vs. "Copy Fail 2":

                                      Dirty Frag is TWO vulnerabilities:

                                      1. The xfrm-ESP Page-Cache Write vulnerability has been assigned CVE-2026-43284 and patched in mainline at f4c50a4034e6.
                                      2. The RxRPC Page-Cache Write vulnerability has been reserved as CVE-2026-43500 for tracking; no patch exists in any tree yet.

                                      Copy Fail 2 is a "clean room" rediscovery/exploitation of f4c50a4034e6 (CVE-2026-43284)

                                      Since Copy Fail 2 was published to GitHub 1 hour earlier than Dirty Frag was published. The Dirty Frag writeup specifies that the embargo was broken, and as a result TWO vulnerabilities were disclosed.

                                      Personally, I think that if you publish a patch for a vulnerability, and then you begin an embargo a week after it was published, that doesn't really count as an "embargo"? πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

                                      Fun stuff...

                                      Link Preview ImageLink Preview ImageLink Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                                      wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wdormann@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wdormann@infosec.exchange
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #18

                                      And in case Dirty Frag wasn't unpatched enough for you, IKotas labs has found a new variant of Dirty Frag

                                      So far, patches have only landed in today's Linux 7.0.6 and 6.18.29.

                                      Link Preview Image
                                      nyanbinary@infosec.exchangeN wiert@mastodon.socialW wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 3 Replies Last reply
                                      1
                                      0
                                      • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                                      • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                                        And in case Dirty Frag wasn't unpatched enough for you, IKotas labs has found a new variant of Dirty Frag

                                        So far, patches have only landed in today's Linux 7.0.6 and 6.18.29.

                                        Link Preview Image
                                        nyanbinary@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                        nyanbinary@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                        nyanbinary@infosec.exchange
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #19

                                        @wdormann Ok Siri, how do I temporarily disable the Linux kernel in general

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • wdormann@infosec.exchangeW wdormann@infosec.exchange

                                          And in case Dirty Frag wasn't unpatched enough for you, IKotas labs has found a new variant of Dirty Frag

                                          So far, patches have only landed in today's Linux 7.0.6 and 6.18.29.

                                          Link Preview Image
                                          wiert@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                          wiert@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                          wiert@mastodon.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #20

                                          @wdormann English version of that post: https://ikotaslabs.com/news/2026-05-11?page=1&lang-en

                                          wdormann@infosec.exchangeW 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups