Stay Ahead With Linux Security News

When researchers announced GhostLock, many people focused on the exploit. What stood out to me wasn't just what the vulnerability could do, but how long it had remained hidden. The flaw had lived in the Linux kernel for roughly 15 years before it was publicly identified by researchers. That means the flaw survived hundreds of kernel releases and years of upstream development before it was publicly documented. It raises an uncomfortable question about one of open source's oldest assumptions....

Spin up a fresh Linux VPS with default settings and check /var/log/auth.log ninety seconds later. There will already be failed login attempts — not dozens, hundreds, sometimes before the deployment script has even finished running. . Automated bots scan the entire IPv4 address space non-stop, and port 22 with password authentication open is exactly what they're looking for. Most cloud providers have seen enough of this that a new instance gets its first probe within a minute of going live....

If you’re running Gitea in a container, stop what you’re doing and check your versioning right now. We’re looking at a critical vulnerability— CVE-2026-20896 —shipped directly in Gitea’s official Docker images. It’s a 9.8 CVSS-rated "open door" that lets any unauthenticated attacker stroll in and impersonate any user on your system, admin account included, without needing a password or a token. The reality? This isn't some complex, low-level kernel exploit. It’s a classic "secure-by-default"...

There was a time when Linux meant server rooms and hobbyist forums. These days it's on regular laptops, and a big part of that is people getting fed up with commercial operating systems scraping their data, shipping telemetry nobody asked for, and boxing them into hardware ecosystems they can't opt out of. . None of that makes Linux immune to trouble though. Yes, it dodges most of the mainstream malware that everyone else deals with. But the software running on top, and honestly the person...

There's a gap between what Linux systems log by default and what you actually need to detect a compromise. Most environments have logging active, which creates a sense of coverage that doesn't hold up under investigation. . When you start pulling logs after an incident, what you find is fragmented activity — a login here, a process there, but no clear narrative of how access was gained, what was executed, or how far the attacker moved. You piece together a timeline rather than reading one....