13 comments

  • userbinator 0 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.

  • BobbyTables2 26 minutes ago
    Are these primarily AI-assisted findings ?

    Seems like an enormous increase over 2024 and 2025.

    • ganelonhb 5 minutes ago
      Yes, naturally. It’s a brave new world.
  • sva_ 16 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.

  • modeless 1 hour ago
    1,313 vulnerabilities, to be precise.
  • imoverclocked 15 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.
  • tetrisgm 22 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 14 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.
  • thallium205 41 minutes ago
    Pretty much any kernel bug gets a CVE by default now, right?
    • wjholden 36 minutes ago
      Is that all there is here? The quantifier "several" did not prepare me for the wall of CVE numbers in this list.
    • seba_dos1 5 minutes ago
      Yes, it's a nothing burger.
    • slopinthebag 21 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 16 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

  • DominoTree 37 minutes 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)
  • embedding-shape 6 minutes ago
    "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.

  • jaimex2 3 minutes ago
    s/discovered/fixed
  • SadErn 15 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • ofjcihen 32 minutes ago
    [dead]