CVE-2026-89762: Software Security Vulnerability Vulnerability

HIGH
Advisory Identifier: GHSA-p69h-p269-mrvc
CVSS 7.8
Published
Advisory Summary

CVE-2026-89762 is a HIGH (CVSS 7.8) security vulnerability vulnerability (General Security Weakness) affecting Software libraries in the Maven ecosystem. Remediation is available in the latest vendor maintenance releases.

CVE-2026-89762 at a Glance

CVE Identifier CVE-2026-89762
GHSA Identifier GHSA-p69h-p269-mrvc
Severity HIGH
CVSS v3.1 Base Score 7.8
CWE Classification General Security Weakness
Affected Product Software
Package Ecosystem Maven
Published Date
Last Updated

Security Impact

CVSS: 7.8

The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Attack Vector Local (AV:L)
Attack Complexity Low (AC:L)
Privileges Required Low (PR:L)
User Interaction None (UI:N)
Scope Unchanged (S:U)
Confidentiality High (C:H)
Integrity High (I:H)
Availability High (A:H)

How to Fix CVE-2026-89762

To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Software dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.

Verify Direct and Transitive Dependencies

Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:

mvn dependency:tree

How to Check if You Are Affected

To determine whether your Java application is affected by CVE-2026-89762, inspect your build dependencies using the Maven Dependency Plugin:

mvn dependency:tree

Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Software in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than the patched release), your application is affected.

Note: The mvn dependency:tree command inspects the resolved dependency graph declared in your project's POM files; it does not perform automated security scanning or inspect runtime dynamic classpaths. Always verify runtime container classpaths and shaded JARs.

Technical Details

Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis

This vulnerability is classified under General Security Weakness. In Software, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.

Source Advisory Statement

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: apparmor: fix cred UAF caused by begin_current_label_crit_section() AppArmor's begin_current_label_crit_section() is a scary function called from lots of LSM hooks (in particular VFS/socket-related ones) that checks if the label referenced by the current creds is marked FLAG_STALE, and if so, attempts to use aa_replace_current_label() to replace the creds with an updated version that uses a new label. The first problem with this is that it would directly lead to UAF of `struct cred` if anything in the kernel takes a pointer to the current creds and accesses these past a security hook invocation that replaces creds, like so: ``` const struct cred *cred = current_cred(); alloc_file_pseudo(...); uid_t uid = cred->euid; ``` I don't know if anything in the kernel actually does this, but I think it is very surprising that this pattern could lead to UAF. The second problem is that things go wrong when aa_replace_current_label() runs with overridden credentials. aa_replace_current_label() bails out if `current_cred() != current_real_cred()` (mirroring the check in proc_pid_attr_write()), but this check can't actually reliably detect overridden credentials because the overridden creds can be the same as the objective creds. So in approximately the following scenario, things go wrong: 1. task begins with <creds A> (as both objective and subjective creds), with refcount=2 2. task grabs an extra reference on <creds A> for overriding 3. task calls override_creds(<creds A>), which returns a pointer to the old subjective creds (<creds A>) 4. task enters AppArmor LSM hook 5. AppArmor checks that objective/subjective creds are equal 6. AppArmor replaces both cred pointers with <creds B> and drops 2 refs on <creds A> 7. task leaves AppArmor LSM hook 8. task calls revert_creds(<creds A>) 9. now task->cred is <creds A> while task->real_cred is <creds B>, but the task_struct logically holds two references to <creds B> 10. another task drops the extra reference on <creds A> that was used for overriding, refcount drops to 0 11. now task->real_cred points to freed creds At this point, any access to current_cred() will be UAF. I have a test case where I run aa-disable on a profile while a process using that profile is blocked on splice() from a FUSE passthrough file into a full pipe; after the profile update, the pipe becomes empty, splice() resumes, the credentials go out of sync, and a subsequent getuid() syscall results in a KASAN UAF splat. To fix this, instead of directly replacing creds, do it via task_work that will run at the end of the current syscall. (The point in time at which the cred replacement happens should have no correctness impact; it is just a performance optimization to avoid unnecessarily touching the refcount of the new label.) Note that AppArmor still performs direct cred replacements in the sb_pivotroot LSM hook after this change, and that direct cred replacements can still happen in VFS ->write() callbacks via proc_pid_attr_write(). There are two options for what to do with aa_dup_task_ctx(): Either explicitly reset new->label_replacement_pending after the entire aa_task_ctx has been copied, or switch to manually copying members over. I am switching to manually copying members over because that should make bugs more obvious.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-89762?
CVE-2026-89762 is a security vulnerability in Software classified as a security vulnerability vulnerability under General Security Weakness.
Which Software versions are affected?
Affected versions include releases prior to current release patches.
What version fixes CVE-2026-89762?
Upgrading to current release patches (or the latest patched release for your respective branch) resolves the vulnerability.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-89762?
CVE-2026-89762 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (HIGH) with vector string CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H.
What CWE is associated with CVE-2026-89762?
CVE-2026-89762 is classified under General Security Weakness.
How can I check Maven dependencies for CVE-2026-89762?
Run the dependency tree command: 'mvn dependency:tree'. This command lists direct and transitive dependencies in your build configuration so you can verify if a vulnerable version is resolved.
Machine-readable OSV JSON OSV v1.5 Schema
Normalized schema output
{
  "schema_version" : "1.4.0",
  "id" : "GHSA-p69h-p269-mrvc",
  "modified" : "2026-09-13T09:32:30Z",
  "published" : "2026-09-11T21:31:39Z",
  "aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-89762" ],
  "details" : "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\napparmor: fix cred UAF caused by begin_current_label_crit_section()\n\nAppArmor's begin_current_label_crit_section() is a scary function called\nfrom lots of LSM hooks (in particular VFS/socket-related ones) that checks\nif the label referenced by the current creds is marked FLAG_STALE, and if\nso, attempts to use aa_replace_current_label() to replace the creds with an\nupdated version that uses a new label.\n\nThe first problem with this is that it would directly lead to UAF of\n`struct cred` if anything in the kernel takes a pointer to the current\ncreds and accesses these past a security hook invocation that replaces\ncreds, like so:\n```\nconst struct cred *cred = current_cred();\nalloc_file_pseudo(...);\nuid_t uid = cred->euid;\n```\nI don't know if anything in the kernel actually does this, but I think it\nis very surprising that this pattern could lead to UAF.\n\nThe second problem is that things go wrong when aa_replace_current_label()\nruns with overridden credentials. aa_replace_current_label() bails out if\n`current_cred() != current_real_cred()` (mirroring the check in\nproc_pid_attr_write()), but this check can't actually reliably detect\noverridden credentials because the overridden creds can be the same as the\nobjective creds.\n\nSo in approximately the following scenario, things go wrong:\n\n1. task begins with <creds A> (as both objective and subjective creds),\n   with refcount=2\n2. task grabs an extra reference on <creds A> for overriding\n3. task calls override_creds(<creds A>), which returns a pointer to the old\n   subjective creds (<creds A>)\n4. task enters AppArmor LSM hook\n5. AppArmor checks that objective/subjective creds are equal\n6. AppArmor replaces both cred pointers with <creds B> and drops 2 refs on\n   <creds A>\n7. task leaves AppArmor LSM hook\n8. task calls revert_creds(<creds A>)\n9. now task->cred is <creds A> while task->real_cred is <creds B>, but the\n   task_struct logically holds two references to <creds B>\n10. another task drops the extra reference on <creds A> that was used for\n    overriding, refcount drops to 0\n11. now task->real_cred points to freed creds\n\nAt this point, any access to current_cred() will be UAF.\n\nI have a test case where I run aa-disable on a profile while a process\nusing that profile is blocked on splice() from a FUSE passthrough file into\na full pipe; after the profile update, the pipe becomes empty, splice()\nresumes, the credentials go out of sync, and a subsequent getuid() syscall\nresults in a KASAN UAF splat.\n\nTo fix this, instead of directly replacing creds, do it via task_work that\nwill run at the end of the current syscall. (The point in time at which the\ncred replacement happens should have no correctness impact; it is just a\nperformance optimization to avoid unnecessarily touching the refcount of\nthe new label.)\n\nNote that AppArmor still performs direct cred replacements in the\nsb_pivotroot LSM hook after this change, and that direct cred replacements\ncan still happen in VFS ->write() callbacks via proc_pid_attr_write().\n\nThere are two options for what to do with aa_dup_task_ctx(): Either\nexplicitly reset new->label_replacement_pending after the entire\naa_task_ctx has been copied, or switch to manually copying members over.\nI am switching to manually copying members over because that should make\nbugs more obvious.",
  "severity" : [ {
    "type" : "CVSS_V3",
    "score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H"
  } ],
  "affected" : [ ],
  "references" : [ {
    "type" : "ADVISORY",
    "url" : "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-89762"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/361488984d668235438faac28635f3632351407f"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3f4ae5fab613dca01d6a2a8210dd832e009fcf47"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/580f777d6d9fd07fc034bd1aeba5c30fd48871a2"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/587a6a92b93ec314c583bbf747413af170d42540"
  } ],
  "database_specific" : {
    "cwe_ids" : [ ],
    "severity" : "HIGH",
    "github_reviewed" : false,
    "github_reviewed_at" : null,
    "nvd_published_at" : "2026-09-11T20:20:07Z"
  }
}