Rendered at 01:33:41 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
Fordec 13 minutes ago [-]
This is great, more access did provide more eyes on these problems.
But, does that all of these being found now call into question, not the open source model logic itself, but the ability of human eyes to find security issues? These vulnerabilities have been sitting here for however long, but how many thousands of humans did not find them before AI?
SchemaLoad 10 minutes ago [-]
Even before AI we have known that no one is smart enough to write bug free C. And with every bug being a launch platform for a full exploit it's become a big deal.
1over137 9 minutes ago [-]
No one is smart enough to write bug free in any language.
zakisaad 3 minutes ago [-]
This is the reason why performant and "safe" systems languages are on the rise and being accepted into foundational areas of our operating systems (such as the kernel). When the attack defense surface is tighter (language, tooling, compiler instead of the actual code itself), the smart folks can stay at that layer, while the masses can write more code at a level of abstraction that nullifies many of these vulnerabilities by default.
SchemaLoad 7 minutes ago [-]
That's why we designed better languages that can block the compilation if memory hasn't been handled properly.
john_strinlai 32 minutes ago [-]
note that _any_ bugfix is assigned a cve, which makes for big numbers.
>“Due to the layer at which the Linux kernel is in a system, almost any bug might be exploitable to compromise the security of the kernel… Because of this, the CVE assignment team is overly cautious and assign CVE numbers to any bugfix that they identify.”
"number of cves" is a useless metric, especially when it comes to the kernel.
SAI_Peregrinus 21 minutes ago [-]
Tautologically every bug can legitimately be assigned a CVE, since every bug prevents some feature from working as intended. It's therefore a denial of service, which by the definition of the CVE system using CVSS means every bug is at least a 1/Low level vulnerability to CVSS v4.0.
If you're willing to stretch, missing but planned features also deny the use of said features since they haven't been added yet, and so are CVSS 1/Low vulnerabilities.
Resume-driven development for security researchers has never been easier!
rerdavies 22 minutes ago [-]
With particular emphasis on "almost any bug might be exploitable".
drfloyd51 24 minutes ago [-]
Is it possible that some of these bugs were already exploited by governments? And AI might help use close of that kind of thing? (And expose other kinds of things , in a kind of AI arms race?)
bhouston 16 minutes ago [-]
Probably. Organizations specializing in hacking are probably having a great time hacking everything and installing permanent presence. It is probably like a gold rush period.
sippingabonedry 14 minutes ago [-]
Will everyone chill the F out for a minute?
These get released every few weeks. Tons of CVEs. If a kernel developer farts in the forest, does anyone hear it?
August had separate Debian kernel updates released four days apart. Does anyone even reboot that often?
I have three kernels installed over the last 45 days or so and I probably missed a few.
nightfly 7 minutes ago [-]
I've been doing Linux sys-admin work for 10+ years. Used to be I could read the full report on what ever vulnerabilities came out and triage which servers needed to be updated now and which could wait. A few years ago notifications started having so many it would take more time/effort to read everything than it would to patch everything. With this notification there's even ten times more...
tetrisgm 59 minutes ago [-]
That’s probably a great thing. The initial friction of AI overwhelming projects certainly sucks, but once there are better processes to deal with them it’s going to strengthen the quality of so many projects!
SchemaLoad 52 minutes ago [-]
Long term we will end up with software with no low hanging fruit exploits left. But right now we are in a period where low hanging fruit is everywhere and it's easier to exploit systems than ever before.
modeless 2 hours ago [-]
1,313 vulnerabilities, to be precise.
nathell 34 minutes ago [-]
In Heroes of Might & Magic 3, “several” means 5–9. 10–19 is “pack”, 20–49 is “lots”, 50–99 is “horde”, 100–249 is “throng”, 250–499 is “swarm”, 500–999 is “zounds…” and 1000+ is “legion”.
I suggest this post be renamed “A legion of vulnerabilities has been discovered…”
userbinator 38 minutes ago [-]
Several vulnerabilities have been discovered in the Linux kernel that may lead to a privilege escalation, denial of service or information leaks.
Remotely or locally exploitable? This is very lacking on information.
walrus01 3 minutes ago [-]
If any of these were remotely exploitable it would be getting much louder and more urgent news. Local privilege escalation bugs are encountered all the time.
SchemaLoad 34 minutes ago [-]
If they were bugs of consequence you could expect each one to get it's own domain with a scary name and a logo.
adastra22 27 minutes ago [-]
Unfortunately no, there are a lot more that fly under the radar.
BobbyTables2 1 hours ago [-]
Are these primarily AI-assisted findings ?
Seems like an enormous increase over 2024 and 2025.
10 minutes ago [-]
ganelonhb 43 minutes ago [-]
Yes, naturally. It’s a brave new world.
sva_ 53 minutes ago [-]
Seems like the CVE sequence has, for the first time, reached >100000 this year (Which does not imply 100k vulns though)
Apparently by late summer this year, there were already more vulnerabilities found than in all of 2025.
thallium205 1 hours ago [-]
Pretty much any kernel bug gets a CVE by default now, right?
wjholden 1 hours ago [-]
Is that all there is here? The quantifier "several" did not prepare me for the wall of CVE numbers in this list.
vdfs 34 minutes ago [-]
https://docs.kernel.org/process/cve.html states that because almost any kernel bug can potentially compromise system security, the CVE team acts with extreme caution and labels nearly all bug fixes with a CVE
seba_dos1 43 minutes ago [-]
Yes. It looks funny, but it's a nothing burger.
slopinthebag 58 minutes ago [-]
yes because the majority are memory safety issues, and it's automatically assumed that a memory safety bug can lead to a vuln
one again illustrating the importance of encapsulating unsafe behavior. perhaps c should get a __UNSAFE { } block, where memory access is encapsulated and thus most bugs occurring outside of those blocks do not need to be marked as CVEs.
akersten 54 minutes ago [-]
> perhaps c should get a __UNSAFE { } block,
I think the convention for this is at the filesystem level and most programmers use the `.c` suffix to indicate it
slopinthebag 37 minutes ago [-]
in that case we need a block of system memory marked as unsafe so i can run these programs in it encapsulated
perhaps we could call it a sedimentchest?
DominoTree 1 hours ago [-]
I was looking earlier and the majority of these do not have a CVSS score assigned to them yet, but a lot of them that did were >7.0 (although I suppose by nature that the more impactful CVEs are going to be scored more quickly)
imoverclocked 52 minutes ago [-]
Is there a way to know if a particular vanilla kernel has a particular CVE addressed? Unhelpfully, the ChangeLog-* only seems to contain sporadic references to CVEs.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2 minutes ago [-]
What do you mean by vanilla kernel? Look at the patches that your distro applies. Should be in their sources
crtasm 49 minutes ago [-]
Clicking them here lists specific kernels, is that enough to tell you?
"Several" feels a bit of an understatement, there are 1313 CVEs listed on that page!
Wonder how many of these NSA and others been sitting on, for how long and how many are still there? I guess the silver lining with the aixplosion of CVEs is that software eventually will get more secure.
SchemaLoad 36 minutes ago [-]
Something to keep in mind is the Linux project registered as an authority to create their own CVE numbers in 2024. Previously the majority of bugs would just be fixed without note unless there was a demonstration that it could be exploited.
Now they just give almost every bug a CVE number.
vdfs 36 minutes ago [-]
Any kernel bug gets a CVE even if it's not really a vulnerability or can be exploited
jaimex2 41 minutes ago [-]
s/discovered/fixed
jeffbee 24 minutes ago [-]
Linux has never, at any point in history, lacked flaws that could be exploited to escalate privileges. The only question has been how well-known the flaws were, and when. The count of latent local privilege escalation bugs has never been zero.
SadErn 53 minutes ago [-]
AI is finishing the job that Snowden started. If we backfill all these holes privacy can be preserved.
But, does that all of these being found now call into question, not the open source model logic itself, but the ability of human eyes to find security issues? These vulnerabilities have been sitting here for however long, but how many thousands of humans did not find them before AI?
>“Due to the layer at which the Linux kernel is in a system, almost any bug might be exploitable to compromise the security of the kernel… Because of this, the CVE assignment team is overly cautious and assign CVE numbers to any bugfix that they identify.”
https://docs.kernel.org/process/cve.html
"number of cves" is a useless metric, especially when it comes to the kernel.
If you're willing to stretch, missing but planned features also deny the use of said features since they haven't been added yet, and so are CVSS 1/Low vulnerabilities.
Resume-driven development for security researchers has never been easier!
These get released every few weeks. Tons of CVEs. If a kernel developer farts in the forest, does anyone hear it?
August had separate Debian kernel updates released four days apart. Does anyone even reboot that often?
I have three kernels installed over the last 45 days or so and I probably missed a few.
I suggest this post be renamed “A legion of vulnerabilities has been discovered…”
Remotely or locally exploitable? This is very lacking on information.
Seems like an enormous increase over 2024 and 2025.
Apparently by late summer this year, there were already more vulnerabilities found than in all of 2025.
one again illustrating the importance of encapsulating unsafe behavior. perhaps c should get a __UNSAFE { } block, where memory access is encapsulated and thus most bugs occurring outside of those blocks do not need to be marked as CVEs.
I think the convention for this is at the filesystem level and most programmers use the `.c` suffix to indicate it
perhaps we could call it a sedimentchest?
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/l...
Searching around, the best I have found so far for vanilla kernels is: https://linuxcvetracker.com
It does require a little clicking around to get all the info I want though. Time to pull out curl+awk! :)
Wonder how many of these NSA and others been sitting on, for how long and how many are still there? I guess the silver lining with the aixplosion of CVEs is that software eventually will get more secure.
Now they just give almost every bug a CVE number.