<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T03:09:12.963446+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/bdu:2026-02696</id>
    <title>bdu:2026-02696</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T03:09:14.285290+00:00</updated>
    <content>bdu:2026-02696</content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/bdu:2026-02696"/>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-38499</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-38499 — clone_private_mnt(): make sure that caller has CAP_SYS_ADMIN in the right userns</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T03:09:14.285568+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>clone_private_mnt(): make sure that caller has CAP_SYS_ADMIN in the right userns</p>
<p>What we want is to verify there is that clone won't expose something
hidden by a mount we wouldn't be able to undo.  "Wouldn't be able to undo"
may be a result of MNT_LOCKED on a child, but it may also come from
lacking admin rights in the userns of the namespace mount belongs to.</p>
<p>clone_private_mnt() checks the former, but not the latter.</p>
<p>There's a number of rather confusing CAP_SYS_ADMIN checks in various
userns during the mount, especially with the new mount API; they serve
different purposes and in case of clone_private_mnt() they usually,
but not always end up covering the missing check mentioned above.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-38499"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
