This report questions `dirtyfrag`'s vulnerability on Gentoo Linux, specifically kernel 6.18.25-gentoo on x86_64. The exploit failed with `rc=1`. This indicates varying exploitability across Linux distributions and kernel versions. For security product vendors, this highlights the challenge of ensuring consistent exploit efficacy across a fragmented Linux ecosystem. Customers require clear vulnerability matrices and reliable exploit performance. Inconsistent results, like this Gentoo case, create uncertainty and increase validation overhead for security teams, impacting adoption of security tools that rely on specific exploit chains.
Seems once a host as run the exploit, it won't stop until rebooted. ``` [tdockendorf@OMIT dirtyfrag]$ ./exp dirtyfrag: failed (rc=1) ``` On mitigated host that hadn't been exploited yet.
jine • May 7, 2026
Correct - i can confirm that, exploited hosts / tests the mitigation (removing/disabling esp4 esp6 and rxrpc) do need a reboot. Just removing the kernel modules without rebooting does not affect al...
cambid • May 7, 2026
Can you try to drop the page cache after the exploit? This should work without a reboot. ``` sudo echo 3 > /prox/sys/vm/drop_caches ```
It does not on any of the devices I have tested. But it does not mean they are not affected, just that this specific code does not work for those targets. They might still be vulnerable.
rouault • May 7, 2026
> But it does not mean they are not affected, just that this specific code does not work for those targets the particular exploit contains x86_64 binary code (see https://github.com/V4bel/dirtyfrag...
rollerozxa • May 7, 2026
[Comment thread on HN about it](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48054201). The Linux kernel used by Android may be hardened to make it not possible (I don't know if Copy Fail was ever possible...
Exploitability and compilation on EL7 (CentOS 7.9)
Top Replies
maxpoulin64 • May 7, 2026
That kernel is way too old for that. The bug was introduced in a commit from 2017-01-17, your kernel is from 2013.
flakrat • May 7, 2026
It's true that 3.10 was released in 2013 (with LTS thru 2017 I think). That said, Red Hat does a lot of back porting into their EL kernels and 3.10.0-1160 was released in 2020 (still old) with end ...
maxpoulin64 • May 7, 2026
They usually backport security fixes, not entire features. If it's not essential, it's not backported. I can't see why they would have backported that stuff unless it was breaking something else im...
Market intelligence mapped to dirtyfrag (exploit vulnerability).
What is the technical positioning of dirtyfrag (exploit vulnerability)?
Based on our AI analysis of the original developer request, its primary technical positioning is: Vulnerability status on Gentoo Linux
What is the general sentiment around dirtyfrag (exploit vulnerability)?
Yes, we have tracked 1 direct responses and active debates regarding this specific topic originating from GitHub Issue.
Which technical concepts are associated with dirtyfrag (exploit vulnerability)?
Our proprietary extraction maps dirtyfrag (exploit vulnerability) to adjacent architectural concepts including Gentoo Base System, x86_64, Intel Xeon, GNU/Linux.
Engagement Signals
1
Replies
open
Issue Status
Cross-Market Term Frequency
Quantifies the cross-market adoption of foundational terms like x86_64 and Gentoo Base System by tracking occurrence frequency across active SaaS architectures and enterprise developer debates.