88
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by INeedMana@piefed.zip to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

I came across the link via https://mastodon.social/@CuratedHackerNews/117481600704689796

Last time I touched php it was ~20 years ago and maybe for a month. Could someone with actual php understanding weigh in?

Somehow, somewhere between the lines, my understanding was that there have been observances of the vuln being used in the wild before the 14 UTC. And that wasn't from reading news sites

all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Nugscree@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

There are two CVE's (CVE-2026-109618, CVE-2026-109619), both with a rating of 9.2 out of 10. They allow unauthenticated code execution.

From the phpfoundation website:

CVE-2026-109618 / GHSA-w8hw-w9fx-j79w: RCE via OOM corruption (out-of-memory): If a request reached PHP's memory_limit at exactly the wrong moment, PHP could leave partially initialized internal data behind and later treat it as valid, corrupting memory. On Apache with mod_php, an unauthenticated request can trigger this before any application code runs, and full remote code execution was demonstrated with default settings. Remote code execution was also confirmed on PHP-FPM through application-level code paths.

CVE-2026-109619 / GHSA-6wmf-4rv5-p3rp: RCE via stale global state: A fatal error at the wrong point could leave internal state pointing to memory that belonged to a previous request. A later request handled by the same worker could then use that freed memory. A use-after-free and worker crash were confirmed, and the reporter demonstrated remote code execution against a real-world application running on Apache with mod_php.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip -1 points 2 days ago

Yes, but from the page I linked

One really amusing thing in common with most of these "PoC"s is that they lean on "LFI", or local-file-inclusion, to make the vulnerability. In non-php terms, their exploit chain requires the server to already have a severe code-level vulnerability.

It's not rare for PHP apps to be fucked in some sense, but requiring the server to have an existing vulnerability where users could cat /etc/password is an insane pre-requisite. If you need this, this does not make this a severe bug.

For sure that this is still a bug that should be patched. But I do remember "don't eval on user sent stuff" rule. Or is this really prevalent in PHP ecosystem?

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Dont use eval, period

If you use eval, you're doing it wrong

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 2 points 1 day ago

That is my understanding too. But then when I was reading the article, there was a line somewhere that in order for the exploit to be successful, the server needs to be using eval

[-] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 6 points 2 days ago

Or is this really prevalent in PHP ecosystem?

Not anymore.

You used to see eval a TON in like the early days, with like PHP 4 and 5. People just weren't very experienced and PHP in itself had it's limitations, and people worked around those by utilizing eval.

But modern PHP code rarely ever uses eval. Modern toolings like PHPMD even flag eval as an error, causing it to fail a pipeline if used in one. If you find eval in a codebase today, it's either a badly modernized legacy one or written by a retard.

Those PoCs are fake. You can exploit a page that just prints "hello."

[-] xthexder@l.sw0.com 7 points 2 days ago

What confuses me as someone who hasn't written PHP in ages, is why is it supposedly so easy for a request to hit the memory limit? Does this only work on servers that accept user uploads and other large request payloads? People are saying a static PHP page can be exploited, but I don't understand how if it's behind even a basic nginx instance with default request limit of 1MB.

[-] neclimdul@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

yeah the uploadprogress and multipart are caused by php loading the request into memory and that going over the limit. thats the most straightforward and dangerous and one of the mitigations was limiting uplaod sizes. But they triggered it first using Wordpress to trigger the oom. And it sounds like there are ways to cause the form processing to bail without and oom and trigger a similar pointer reuse.

So the post/upload oom are maybe the most interesting but you can bet if people dont patch we'll see more involved versions. and since php is hidden in things like routers and server management devices and... thats probably a safe bet.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 3 points 2 days ago

AFAIU this is not about the size of the file but making the php process that runs a file surpass the configured limit (of RAM). At which point sometimes something goes wrong with letting go of that memory and then the second vulnerability allows using that limboed memory that not only shouldn't be used but also can contain some internal values from the first one

[-] GottaHaveFaith@fedia.io 14 points 3 days ago

I remember someone on hacker news saying they were able to dump the whole database from their server, I cannot know if that s true but I don't think everybody panicked for nothing

[-] UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Link or it didn’t happen

This did happen, update your stuff: https://lemmy.world/post/53488160

[-] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 days ago

Yes the vulns are real. No that does not mean a system with the vuln is automatically and noticeably exploitable: that assumes there are no other defense systems or simply other happenstance logical walls around (firewalls, datacenter range blocks, seven proxies, 28 NATs, Anubis, whathaveyou).

My understanding is that CVEs are ranked not by Real World conditions but rather under an "idealized threat condition" that imagines your machine is essentially connected with a straight wire to the root DNS serves of the internet, given a public IPv4 address, and the off switch is dislodged or somehow made unavailable.

I don't think any of those walls help except for a WAF that knows what to look for. I don't know exactly what the real exploits look like but I heard something about constructing multipart form bodies that expand to a surprisingly large amount of PHP memory compared to the size of the request body, and that's probably something a heuristic on a WAF could detect. I would want to do more research before relying on that.

[-] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago

So a multipart form "zip bomb"? Sounds like the kind of thing that would do... well, that. But also, by that point you don't even need a WAF to block it, IIRC multipart forms can be disabled or their memory limit clamped on php.ini.

(Not that I'd rely on that; not everyone has access to php.ini. But then again, we are talking about a world where there are more than one (1) ways of dealing with problems)

I don't know if they can be disabled, but I think the memory limit is actually the problem. One of the vulnerabilities is related to how PHP handles exceeding a memory limit. I don't know if it's the same limit you're thinking of. I have been avoiding PHP for a long time. If it were that simple, I'd have expected the advisories to mention it as a mitigation.

[-] diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

From the very little I've researched, a DoS with it isn't hard but for RCE one needs to know some pointers inside... doable if you assume it's Debian or something then just download a bunch of versions locally and try them. This also implies that most hardened distributions are all unaffected (because relocations) and source builds are effectively unaffected unless the binary is dumped somehow.

[-] i_am_not_a_robot@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yes, and even for Debian because of ASLR, but these vulnerabilities may allow memory to be leaked and from those memory leaks an attacker can reconstruct the necessary information. That's obviously not something just anybody could have done, but publicly available AI tools have made this level of attack complexity much more accessible. In https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CiZmq2llDg&t=629s they first find the vulnerability but their AI cheated to make it exploitable and then somebody else gives them a way to leak memory to figure out where things are in memory. I don't think having errors enabled is actually necessary for the exploit to work, because if that was the case the PHP security announcement would have said "turn off errors" instead of "turn off your server now."

[-] diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 days ago

blind rop? Well, if they are using AI they are unlikely to do this in a reasonable amount of time anyway. Also, not sure how one would go on with that if all protectors and pointers change every run and fork like on OpenBSD.

[-] Decronym@lemmy.decronym.xyz 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters
CA (SSL) Certificate Authority
DNS Domain Name Service/System
NAT Network Address Translation
VPS Virtual Private Server (opposed to shared hosting)
nginx Popular HTTP server

5 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 9 acronyms.

[Thread #145 for this comm, first seen 22nd Oct 2026, 21:30] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

[-] spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The PHP vulnerabilities (yes there is more than one) are relatively easy to exploit if you can fiddle with what requests your server receives (easy).

The DNS exploit requires someone to figure out how to man-in-the-middle your connection. While that is trivial for governments, it is much less likely to be done by purely bad actors, simply for how hard "internet" integration is and how visible the problem ends up.

Both are big problems, but only one of them is continually exploitable, as the DNS issues have been largely resolved even before the very public disclosure.

[-] non_burglar@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

What do you mean "DNS exploit"? Neither 109618 nor 109619 mention dns in the exploit path...

[-] cybervseas@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

The eMudhra CA certificate breach.

[-] non_burglar@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

What does that have to do with the PHP vulns?

this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2026
88 points (88.6% liked)

Selfhosted

63189 readers
249 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS