HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.
  • CIGARPoint your coding agent at the right lines and cut its token bill by about a third.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.
  • Gauntlet benchmarkGuard tested with real coding agents: safe work runs, risky actions stop.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 99281 tun require capnetadmin to attach to an ownerless
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard

Get HOL Guard for your computer

HOL Guard is a free desktop app that watches what coding agents such as Claude Code, Codex and Cursor run, read and install, and asks you before anything risky happens.

  • Download for macOS
  • Windows download
  • Linux download

Free. macOS 13+ on Apple silicon, Windows x64, Linux AppImage. Other ways to install

Runs on
macOS 13 or later on Apple silicon, Windows x64 and Linux x86_64.
Price
Free. Paid plans add Guard Cloud for teams. See pricing
Where your data stays
On your computer. Guard Cloud is optional.
Token savings
33% to 38% lower spend across three coding agents in our CIGAR benchmark.

HOL

HOL builds open infrastructure for AI agents: HOL Guard, a directory of AI plugins and MCP servers, an AI agent registry and the open HCS standards.

  • GitHub (opens in a new tab)
  • X (Twitter) (opens in a new tab)
  • YouTube (opens in a new tab)
  • Telegram (opens in a new tab)

HOL Guard

  • What is HOL Guard
  • Features
  • Cut coding agent token costs (CIGAR)
  • Install Guard
  • Download the desktop app
  • Pricing
  • Guard for teams
  • Compare Guard
  • Release notes

Guard for your AI tool

  • Guard for Claude Code
  • Guard for Codex
  • Guard for Cursor
  • Guard for GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Guard for OpenCode
  • Guard for Pi and Oh My Pi
  • Guard for Hermes
  • Guard for OpenClaw
  • All supported AI tools

Research and security

  • Gauntlet: Guard tested with real agents
  • CIGAR token benchmark
  • Research
  • AI security hub
  • Security advisories
  • Active CVEs in AI tools
  • AI agent security guides
  • Extensions and coverage

Plugins and MCP servers

  • Browse AI plugins
  • New plugin launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins

AI agent registry

  • Best AI agents
  • Best ERC-8004 agents
  • Best Virtuals agents
  • Best A2A agents
  • Best x402 payable agents
  • Submit an ERC-8004 contract
  • Feature your agent

Developers

  • Guard docs
  • Documentation index
  • Developer hub
  • Registry API reference
  • OpenAPI spec
  • Registry OpenAPI spec
  • Run in Postman (opens in a new tab)
  • HCS standards

Company

  • About HOL
  • Blog
  • Contribute to HOL
  • Guard contributors
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Affiliate program
  • Contact

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity · Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-99281

tun: Require CAP_NET_ADMIN to attach to an ownerless deviceCVE-2026-99281

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-99281 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in tun: Require CAP_NET_ADMIN to attach to an ownerless device. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Nov 7, 2026Updated Nov 7, 2026Source checked Nov 8, 2026First seen by HOL Nov 7, 2026Material review Nov 7, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Unknown severitySource severity not reported
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=ca6bb5d7ab22ac79f608fe6cbc6b12de6a5a19f0 <2f92c0286cfd58bff9d6d54c01a771073d5eb775 || >=ca6bb5d7ab22ac79f608fe6cbc6b12de6a5a19f0 <e53d1cf05da8ea58a5743b7ce5894fb51b0b9700 || >=ca6bb5d7ab22ac79f608fe6cbc6b12de6a5a19f0 <ffdf678dd16610e3f006dac904bd37c09684673c2f92c0286cfd58bff9d6d54c01a771073d5eb775, e53d1cf05da8ea58a5743b7ce5894fb51b0b9700, ffdf678dd16610e3f006dac904bd37c09684673c
Linux/Linuxgeneric2.6.18Not reported

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to 2f92c0286cfd58bff9d6d54c01a771073d5eb775 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Nov 7, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Nov 7, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Nov 7, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
Upstream source description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tun: Require CAP_NET_ADMIN to attach to an ownerless device Twenty years ago I made creating a tuntap device require CAP_NET_ADMIN in commit ca6bb5d7ab22 ("[NET]: Require CAP_NET_ADMIN to create tuntap devices.") The idea was to allow the permissions on /dev/net/tun to be relaxed to 0666 and thus allow owners of tun devices assigned with TUNSETOWNER to actually open it and get at their devices. What we missed at the time was that persistent devices with *no* owner were already essentially world-consumable, and anyone who could open the device node could also attach to those. Even then, using persistent devices with no explicitly set owner — on the (false) presumption that CAP_NET_ADMIN would be required to open them — wasn't an egregious userspace bug. There are cases where it does make sense to separate the creation/configuration of the netdevice, from the process which shovels packets into it. Since then, TUNSETGROUP was added a year later in commit 8c644623fe7e ("[NET]: Allow group ownership of TUN/TAP devices."). Its commit message noted that if both uid and gid are set, both have to match (in itself a bizarre choice) — but still not that with *neither* set, no permission at all was required. Then in 2012 commit c8d68e6be1c3 ("tuntap: multiqueue support") allowed new queues to be attached to a device from the moment of its creation, with no way for userspace to close the race between creation and a subsequent TUNSET{OWNER,GROUP}. In 2024, commit 3ca459eaba1bf ("tun: fix group permission check") tried to fix things to be saner: only require the user *or* the group to match, in line with standard POSIX permissions, and require CAP_NET_ADMIN if neither the user nor group authorised the access (although it put the CAP_NET_ADMIN check first, and would wrongly have reported the capability as having been used even when it was not). That fix was reverted in commit a70c7b3cbc06 ("tun: revert fix group permission check") due to allegedly causing a regression in an selinux test suite which *expected* the attachment to succeed when authorised by none of user, group, nor CAP_NET_ADMIN: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CAFqZXNtkCBT4f+PwyVRmQGoT3p1eVa01fCG_aNtpt6dakXncUg@mail.gmail.com/ We should not break UAPI. But we don't have to consider an selinux test case which deliberately exercises a security flaw to be UAPI worth preserving either. To which end, I have fixed it in selinux-testsuite commit b2f894f0016b ("tests/tun_tap: set an owner on the device for the relabel tests"). So: fix the lack of CAP_NET_ADMIN check on devices which *haven't* been assigned an owner or group, while leaving the weird tun ownership model as it was (user *and* group have to match, if both are set). If someone still wants to fix the latter (which wasn't actually the reason the previous attempt was reverted), they can do it under separate cover. Permit attaching to an existing device only if an owner and/or group was set and the caller matches all that were set, or if the caller has CAP_NET_ADMIN. The only behavioural change is that a device with no owner or group now requires CAP_NET_ADMIN to attach — precisely the loophole we want to close. And put the CAP_NET_ADMIN check in the right place this time.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Nov 8, 2026
References
3 linked sources
Open source record