Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-46333 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 28% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-30540
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ptrace: slightly saner 'get_dumpable()' logic The 'dumpability' of a task is fundamentally about the memory image of the task - the concept comes from whether it can core dump or…
more
not - and makes no sense when you don't have an associated mm. And almost all users do in fact use it only for the case where the task has a mm pointer. But we have one odd special case: ptrace_may_access() uses 'dumpable' to check various other things entirely independently of the MM (typically explicitly using flags like PTRACE_MODE_READ_FSCREDS). Including for threads that no longer have a VM (and maybe never did, like most kernel threads). It's not what this flag was designed for, but it is what it is. The ptrace code does check that the uid/gid matches, so you do have to be uid-0 to see kernel thread details, but this means that the traditional "drop capabilities" model doesn't make any difference for this all. Make it all make a *bit* more sense by saying that if you don't have a MM pointer, we'll use a cached "last dumpability" flag if the thread ever had a MM (it will be zero for kernel threads since it is never set), and require a proper CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability to override.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Kernel ptrace dumpable logic flaw (CWE-269) bypasses CAP_SYS_PTRACE checks for tasks without mm, directly enabling privilege escalation and credential/memory access via ptrace.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces ptrace access decisions using the corrected dumpable logic and CAP_SYS_PTRACE checks for tasks without an mm.
Enforces least-privilege checks so that only processes holding CAP_SYS_PTRACE can override dumpability restrictions on kernel threads or exited tasks.
Requires timely application of the kernel patch that repairs the get_dumpable() handling for ptrace_may_access().
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.AA-05 enforces least privilege/SoD and periodic reviews that directly remove most privilege-assignment defects, yet CWE-269 also covers escalation paths and role design outside a single access-management control.
PR.AA-01 supplies credential/identity lifecycle support that can reduce some privilege-assignment errors but does not itself assign, modify, or check privileges, leaving most of CWE-269's risk unaddressed.
Config baselines and default reviews can enforce some privilege-related settings (one facet) but do not address code-level assignment/tracking logic that defines CWE-269.
PR.PS-05 can partially limit exploitability of some privilege issues via execution restrictions, but does not address the core design/implementation flaws of CWE-269 at all.
PR.DS-10 protects data-in-use without touching privilege assignment/tracking, so it neither prevents CWE-269 nor removes more than one narrow facet of its risk.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Requiring owner approval, segregation of duties, and periodic reviews prevents the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges to users or processes.
Enforcing minimum-necessary privileges, temporary grants, and separation of administrative versus normal identities prevents the over-assignment of rights that CWE-269 describes.
Dynamic techniques that grant the minimum necessary rights for a given time window and revoke them afterward reduce the window in which excessive or unnecessary privileges can be exploited.
Explicit restrictions on privileged access and segregation of duties limit the scope of privileges that can be assigned, reducing the chance that excessive or unnecessary privileges are granted to entities.
Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.
Separating duties such as developing software from administering production systems prevents any one person from accumulating excessive privileges that would constitute improper privilege management.