Patchlage

CVE-2026-89560

CVE CVE-2026-89560EUVD EUVD-2026-76471Published 2026-09-11T19:44:32.000ZLast changed 2026-09-14T12:01:01.000ZCVSS 8.4

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: landlock: Require LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG for whiteout creation Whiteout objects are used in the upper layer of an OverlayFS to indicate that the file with this name does not exist in the unified view, even if it is present in one of the lower layer file systems. For the userspace implementations of OverlayFS (fuse-overlayfs), whiteout objects can be created from userspace as well: * mknod(2) with S_IFCHR and makedev(0, 0) * renameat2(2) with RENAME_WHITEOUT, creating the whiteout in the old place of the moved file. This commit guards whiteout creation in both of these cases with LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG. Whiteout objects are *not* considered character devices and are not bound to a driver. LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG describes the same permission class as a whiteout object: creating one is the only S_IFCHR creation that the VFS exempts from CAP_MKNOD, so it is as unprivileged as creating a regular file, while LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_CHAR and LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_BLOCK keep meaning the creation of devices that expose a kernel interface [1]. For the mknod(2) case, introduce a Landlock erratum. The creation of whiteout objects through mknod(2) was previously guarded using LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_CHAR, and it is now guarded using LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG. For the renameat2(2) case, fix a bug: Before this commit, renameat2(2) with RENAME_WHITEOUT would create a directory entry even when all LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_* rights were denied. This does not affect normal renames within layered OverlayFS mounts: When doing a regular rename() on a mounted fuse-overlayfs, it is the fuse-overlayfs daemon that exercises renameat2() with RENAME_WHITEOUT, and only the Landlock domain of that daemon is checked there. Depends-on: 49c9e09d9610 ("landlock: Fix handling of disconnected directories") Depends-on: fe72ce6710cb ("landlock: Add errata documentation section") [mic: Record why LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG is the matching right, and add link(2) to the user doc]

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.