Independent & educational platform Not a government body. No link or affiliation with any government organisation. Made for learning only. Test only systems you own or are authorised to test. Become a Partner or Sponsor → Full disclaimer

CVE-2026-98979

Severity not reported
Data quality: partial. Some fields were not provided by the source.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: namespace: refuse an automount below a mount that is in no namespace It's possible to add…

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: namespace: refuse an automount below a mount that is in no namespace It's possible to add autmounts even when the parent mount isn't in the mount namespace of the caller. The only requirement we have is that the parent mount namespace must not be NULL, i.e., unmounted. Problem is that clone_private_mount() has MNT_NS_INTERNAL which makes that trivially true. So that passes the test and attach_recursive_mnt() accepts that as a mount point and funny enough, count_mounts() dereferences MNT_NS_INTERNAL. The problem is it is an error pointer... So we can reach this in userspace via fanotify. A filesystem mark on the lower filesystem of an overlay reports paths on the layer clone and reading the event hands out a descriptor on it. For example with debugfs as the lower layer it goes kaboom: openat(evfd, "tracing", O_DIRECTORY) Oops: general protection fault KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x1d0-0x1d7] RIP: 0010:count_mounts+0x35/0x200 attach_recursive_mnt finish_automount And since that sleeping beauty happens under namespace_sem held for writing every mount operation on the system blocks from then on. Congrats. Use is_mounted() instead which rejects unmounted and internal mounts alike. The open fails with EINVAL just as it did before clone_private_mount() used MNT_NS_INTERNAL.

CVSS
—
Awaiting analysis by NVD
Timeline (UTC)
Published: 2026-10-23 13:17
Modified: 2026-10-23 13:17
NVD status: Received
Last synced 2 days ago
Verified against the source API 2026-10-27 07:05 UTC
Exploitation
Not listed in CISA KEV (as of last catalog sync)
Absence from KEV does not mean a CVE is not exploited. Exploitation status: unknown (no authoritative evidence in our sources).

Affected products

Not reported by the source (unknown — not "none").

Mitigation & advisories

No vendor advisory or patch reference tagged by NVD. Check the references below.

References

Data sources

NVD CVE API 2.0 — fetched 2026-10-27 07:05 UTC · record ↗

Learn the basics

Understanding CVEs and CVSS Scores