Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by lorenzbrun on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:44AM
(#50176518)
I'm pretty sure this is not the vulnerability that's still officially under embargo. I think I found the the two actual vulnerabilities (both UAFs and similar). I patched my own stuff (at least I hope so) and am mirroring traffic to a detector, very interested to see when I get the first hits. Unless I see actual exploit attempts or a full leak I think I'm not going to publish my patches yet.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by idlewords on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:46AM
(#50176932)
I guess the future is people arguing in comments whether a high-severity vulnerability is the one under embargo, or one of various unrelated devastating bugs discovered when people got wind of the embargo and pointed their AI agents at the codebase.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by charcircuit on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:48AM
(#50176546)
You misread. He is saying that the multipart UAF vulnerability part of the overall exploit can't be fixed by session.upload_progress.enabled = off or any other ini option for that matter.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by Mooty on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:59AM
(#50176629)
If you use Nginx, you can temporarly block the subject by disallowing multipart sendings to PHP. This is quite a problem for a lot of forms, but way better that being hacked.
Here is an Nginx patch :
if ($http_content_type ~* "multipart") {
return 403;
}
You can also turn of session progress in php.ini as mentionned but that does not seem to cover every cases :
session.upload_progress.enabled = Off
It assumes PHP frees the upload progress data when it reloads the session. But PHP 8.4 (the one we use is 8.4.24, i don't know for other versions) calls Z_TRY_ADDREF(progress->data) to keep that data alive. The fake function call also seems to contain invalid fields.
This makes me question this particular PoC, not the official PHP security warning. I have not reproduced the exploit, so this is a concern based on reading the code, not proof that the real vulnerabilities cannot be exploited.
But anyway the CVE still exists, and the exploitation is tied to multipart, disabling it seems the best thing you can do now without shutting everything down.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by lifeisloving on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:29AM
(#50176423)
How is this a better source, the current post is a PoC? This is just a warning...
You're not even reading the things you're saying are worse, and reccomending things that arent what you say they are (because you didnt read those either)
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by ffritz on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:24AM
(#50176776)
Any idea if Cloudflare in front of an unpatched site would prevent this? They did 2 updates already today to their managed rulesets but are not specifying what.
"Cloudflare has protections in place for known exploit payloads. There will be more variations to come and the only way to fully protect your site is to update php once released."
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by Hamuko on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:28AM
(#50176806)
I think putting my PHP site behind Cloudflare would be the least I would do if I wanted to keep it online before PHP can be patched. The other alternative is trying to block multi-part uploads before they reach PHP.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by mklepaczewski on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @05:24AM
(#50178009)
Make sure to create CF tunnel to your server and to reject all traffic frin other sources, or to accept traffic only from known CF ips. Otherwise, you're still exposed, even if CF WAF works.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by hparadiz on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:09AM
(#50176678)
Announcing this thing and then putting an embargo on the fix for 24 hours is by far the most irresponsible thing internals has ever done and I have seen them do some insane shit in the past 20 years.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by kalleboo on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:58AM
(#50177033)
It may have made sense when finding exploits required some skill and time so 24 hours would be safe enough but now when anyone can just point an LLM at it...
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by hparadiz on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @03:08AM
(#50177092)
The POC was already out on Sunday apparently. When they announced it they made everyone go looking for it. In the before times even someone with decent cybersecurity and hacking experience might not be able to weaponize a POC. Today anyone can weaponize it immediately.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by shevy-java on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:29AM
(#50176425)
That website looks weird - was it AI coded?
It is visually interesting but also annoying. I hate to
admit it, but as I grow older, I may get dumber and I
much prefer simplicity at all times.
As for PHP: it also is a bit weird how programming languages
have not yet all fixed existing bugs. Has not AI been used
to find bugs or assumed bugs? Why are bugs found in old
code still?
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by redox99 on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:32AM
(#50176452)
Why would they hand code a website for an exploit that they probably found 15 minutes before and will be fixed in a few hours? The copy should have been better though.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by groestl on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:36AM
(#50176469)
It's things like "under the attacker's feet" which completely throw me off. While trying to parse the text, my brain tries to imagine a surprised hacker.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by lifeisloving on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:56AM
(#50176605)
Yeah but this AI music is worse than any AI produced code. They're both awful but I really lose all respect for people who think these Sumo songs sound good. Wow I hate that AI musician voice so much.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by shevy-java on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @01:29AM
(#50176431)
I just wrote almost the same thing (I start to write my
comments before I read what others say, so that it is not
influenced directly what I write). I am glad to come to the
same conclusion - this website is both visually interesting
as well as very annoying.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by fwlr on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:02AM
(#50176646)
I can literally feel my eyes physically defocusing trying to read this, and I can’t help but conclude that, at a level below conscious thought, my brain is trying to defend itself from AI-generated text. Perhaps it is more of a cognitopoison than I explicitly knew.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by coatmatter on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:23AM
(#50176765)
Ctrl-Alt-R for reader view in Firefox, not that it makes the whole thing much more interesting to look at - we'll forget about it all soon enough anyway. Don't forget to tweak the default settings for reader view for a better experience.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by minitech on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @02:46AM
(#50176943)
> PHP doesn’t have any more than others.
Yeah it does. Part of it is being a popular starter language before people know what they’re doing, but a lot of it is legitimately terrible language[1] and API design, especially in older versions. It also has CVE-2026-109618, a type of vulnerability many languages aren’t even capable of having (since it wouldn’t be part of the language, and the library that implemented the equivalent would only be present when necessary and usually not written in C - with some exceptions).
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by AndroTux on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @06:16AM
(#50178478)
> but a lot of it is legitimately terrible language[1] and API design
Unlike well-thought-out languages like JavaScript, of course.
What's the saying? A programming language is either bad, or no one uses it. Discussions about flavors of bad in well-established programming languages are a waste of time.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by minitech on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @10:20PM
(#50190379)
I forget making the claim that JavaScript was a well-thought-out language. But yes, I can see how discussing programming language and library design/implementation, as or with the type of person who trots out trite thought-terminating clichés, could be a waste of time.
Re:PHP session.upload_progress heap UAF (CVE-2026-109618 / -...
by himata4113 on Wednesday October 21, 2026 @06:05PM
(#50188324)
unfortunately php is mosty ...insert forum here...
hell even vanilla xenforo was getting compromised all the time, sure there's smaller frameworks and various government institutions using php, but it has many of the same downfalls that mixing server and client code has, the worst offender that comes to mind that enabled many of these bad practices is next.js
Here is an Nginx patch : if ($http_content_type ~* "multipart") { return 403; }
You can also turn of session progress in php.ini as mentionned but that does not seem to cover every cases : session.upload_progress.enabled = Off
It assumes PHP frees the upload progress data when it reloads the session. But PHP 8.4 (the one we use is 8.4.24, i don't know for other versions) calls Z_TRY_ADDREF(progress->data) to keep that data alive. The fake function call also seems to contain invalid fields.
This makes me question this particular PoC, not the official PHP security warning. I have not reproduced the exploit, so this is a concern based on reading the code, not proof that the real vulnerabilities cannot be exploited.
But anyway the CVE still exists, and the exploitation is tied to multipart, disabling it seems the best thing you can do now without shutting everything down.
You're not even reading the things you're saying are worse, and reccomending things that arent what you say they are (because you didnt read those either)
https://developers.cloudflare.com/waf/change-log/changelog/
"We got you covered" - Dane Knecht (Cloudflare CTO)
"Cloudflare has protections in place for known exploit payloads. There will be more variations to come and the only way to fully protect your site is to update php once released."
How fast will the repos be updated?
It is visually interesting but also annoying. I hate to admit it, but as I grow older, I may get dumber and I much prefer simplicity at all times.
As for PHP: it also is a bit weird how programming languages have not yet all fixed existing bugs. Has not AI been used to find bugs or assumed bugs? Why are bugs found in old code still?
>Leave Nothing
Cringe larping skiddie nonsense
Every programming language has security vulnerabilities. PHP doesn’t have any more than others.
Yeah it does. Part of it is being a popular starter language before people know what they’re doing, but a lot of it is legitimately terrible language[1] and API design, especially in older versions. It also has CVE-2026-109618, a type of vulnerability many languages aren’t even capable of having (since it wouldn’t be part of the language, and the library that implemented the equivalent would only be present when necessary and usually not written in C - with some exceptions).
[1] People have already covered this in depth, but here’s a lesser-mentioned taste: https://web.archive.org/web/20261017012819/https://www.php.n... (one section, btw)
Unlike well-thought-out languages like JavaScript, of course.
What's the saying? A programming language is either bad, or no one uses it. Discussions about flavors of bad in well-established programming languages are a waste of time.
hell even vanilla xenforo was getting compromised all the time, sure there's smaller frameworks and various government institutions using php, but it has many of the same downfalls that mixing server and client code has, the worst offender that comes to mind that enabled many of these bad practices is next.js
reply