CVE-2026-88924
CVE-2026-88924 — Gvfs: gvfs-admin socket ownership race permits local root
A flaw was found in the admin backend of gvfs. The privileged gvfsd-admin daemon changes the ownership of newly created private D-Bus sockets by calling the link-following chown() function on a pathname inside a user-controlled directory. A local attacker can exploit this via a Time-of-Check Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) race condition and exchange the socket pathname with a symbolic link pointing to an arbitrary root-owned file (such as /etc/pam.d/su). The daemon subsequently follows the symlink and changes the ownership of the targeted root-owned file to the attacker's user ID. This allows an authenticated local attacker to modify critical system files, leading to a full local privilege escalation to root.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, Red Hat (CNA), GitHub, GitHub Security Advisory, Red Hat (VEX), SOCRadar CTI
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Unreported
no source claims exploitation
EPSS
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
7
high
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.
Red Hat VEX · CVE-2026-88924
workaround: To mitigate this issue, adjust Polkit rules to require password authentication to start gvfsd-admin or remove execute permissions of the gvfsd-admin binary to prevent execution.
none_available: Affected
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.
- Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
- Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 | — | Vulnerable |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | — | Vulnerable |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | — | Vulnerable |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | — | Vulnerable |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | — | Vulnerable |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Availability
High
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Scope
Unchanged
Attack Complexity
High
Attack Vector
Local
Privileges Req
Low
User Interaction
None
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | CVSS 3.1 | high | 1 | 5.9 | NVD, Red Hat (CNA), GHSA, Red Hat (VEX) |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
What this weakness leads to
MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.
CWE-367 · Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
- Alter Execution Logic
- Unexpected State
- Modify Application Data
- Modify Files or Directories
Mitigation: The most basic advice for TOCTOU vulnerabilities is to not perform a check before the use. This does not resolve the underlying issue of the execution of a function on a resource whose state and identity cannot be assured, but it does help to limit the false sense of security given by the check.
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-367
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /etc/pam.d/su).
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 7.0 (AV:L)
Sep 10, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Sep 10, 2026 · NVD
Reported to Red Hat.
Sep 10, 2026 · Red Hat
Added · GHSA-8w8m-36rw-gg63 published (high)
Sep 10, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 10, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
Reported · Made public.
Sep 9, 2026 · Red Hat
References
6 on the record
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88924
Vendor Advisory
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2531456
Vendor Advisory, Mitre
- gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gvfs/-/issues/875
Vendor Advisory
- nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-88924
NVD
- github.com/advisories/GHSA-8w8m-36rw-gg63
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
- www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-88924
Vendor Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
- Red Hatevery CVE for this vendor
- Race Conditionsame class
- CWE-367other pages naming this weakness
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-88924 is Gvfs: gvfs-admin socket ownership race permits local root, a high vulnerability affecting Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 from Red Hat. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-88924. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-88924. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 7 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.