19 comments

  • ernubufiei 29 minutes ago
    > On October 21st at 07:41 UTC, more than six hours before the coordinated release, Chainguard unilaterally broke the embargo and published built images containing the fix.

    This is incredibly damming of Chainguard. I struggle to see justification for this, even with the chaos approaching the coordinated release.

    • skrrtww 16 minutes ago
      I dunno, the post is awfully critical of Chainguard for leaking a fixed binary 6 hours early, but it was the research firm "partner" that "mistakenly" posted the dancing anime POC video over 24 hours early that created the mass panic (not to mention spawning millions of agents crawling the php codebase and trying to brute force a POC and probably using more energy than a lot of countries in the process).
      • corford 1 minute ago
        Agree. If I'm following along correctly, it seems Calif is really the one to blame not Chaingaurd.
      • cubefox 7 minutes ago
        > but it was the research firm "partner" that "mistakenly" posted the dancing anime POC video over 24 hours early that created the mass panic

        They took it down but someone added the anime stuff and reposted it. Totally irresponsible.

      • john_strinlai 13 minutes ago
        i keep seeing mentions of the video, but is it still available anywhere?
    • yreg 23 minutes ago
      They (is it the CEO?) commented on it earlier here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176735

      In their place I would worry that this was the last time anyone shared an embargoed build with them.

      • dannyw 16 minutes ago
        Let's hope so. Shall we create a new norm? A 365 day timeout, for companies like Chainguard that deliberately break embargoes.

        Very irresponsible behaviour in my opinion; and if it's a decision made unilaterally by their CEO, probably a breach of their SOC 2 certification. What's next? "$X isn't patching this CVE fast enough, here's a binary blob of our fix, don't worry, we're making this free!"

        • cryptonym 7 minutes ago
          I think multiple companies didn't respect the embargo, in different ways.

          That can be for marketing purposes or by mistake. Not sure how to deal with that.

          • dannyw 2 minutes ago
            A security vendor entrusted with advanced patches breaking embargo, is much worse than a security researcher breaking embargo.
    • tflinton 15 minutes ago
      I kinda get Chainguard's position here. They were part of the embargo, saw exploits hitting in the wild already and decided to release rather than hold things back.

      Embargos make sense if no one is exploiting it yet, but if its out in the wild, the best path forward is releaseing as soon as possible.

      • dannyw 13 minutes ago
        Did they actually see exploits in the wild? The PHP Foundation team disputes this, and say they didn't observe any working PoC capable of an exploit.
        • gjsman-1000 13 minutes ago
          Chainguard most likely interpreted Calif's dancing anime girl video as a script kiddie who had found a POC.
          • dannyw 10 minutes ago
            It sounds like there was no "co-ordination" behind any of this co-ordinated disclosure. You'd have expected there to be an IRC channel, a mailing list, a Slack chat, or something for something of this scale.

            Was there even an incident co-ordinator here? Was any of the parties talking to each other?

    • blantonl 23 minutes ago
      This single-handedly assures that I will never, ever do business with Chainguard or any member of its C-suite executive team.
    • john_strinlai 21 minutes ago
      if their comment in true (linked in sibling comments), then it's really not damning. typically an embargo is ended when someone leaks early or it's being exploited in the wild.

      so, if they saw evidence of exploits in the wild, it is not unusual at all to release the fix.

      • ebilgenius 12 minutes ago
        If they're gonna unilaterally release an exploit patch 6 hours before an agreed upon embargo for a CVSS 9.2 that affects like ~70% of the internet then they better have reams of evidence showing this was being exploited in a widespread manner and not just "we saw a dancing anime girl edit of a theoretical exploit on twitter, so we had to release it to the world"
      • blantonl 15 minutes ago
        [flagged]
    • Grollicus 22 minutes ago
      Not sure if this [1] comment is from them?

      Because if there are already publicly available exploits seen, it makes no more sense to keep holding patches back just so that OpenAI etc. can get a nice press release

      [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176735

      • gjsman-1000 20 minutes ago
        So if I'm understanding correctly:

        1. There was a leak of the pre-announcement

        2. Calif sees leak, goes and releases dancing anime girl video before pulling it, goes viral

        3. Chainguard sees dancing anime video, doesn't recognize Calif, and thinks the exploit is in the wild

        [Edit 3a]: Or alternatively, Calif's leaked video causes the PoC to be found by others by providing enough of a lead

        4. Chainguard releases updated binaries thinking it doesn't matter, causing the real exploit to then be found early

        5. Which then causes PHP Foundation to basically have a meltdown

        Personally I blame Calif for the unprofessional video which absolutely completely looks like some script kiddie and for being too detailed [edit 2: assuming Calif produced it and the anime wasn't a prank edit]. In this case it wasn't just unprofessional fun but may have literally messed up the responsible disclosure.

        • mirashii 11 minutes ago
          > 3. Chainguard sees dancing anime video, doesn't recognize Calif, and thinks the exploit is in the wild

          I'm not sure about this part. I saw https://jackalsyn.com/posts/php-up-2026.html going around a bit over 12 hours ago, before the chainguard images went out, and plenty of other chatter of exploitation happening in the wild.

        • ebilgenius 16 minutes ago
          Or maybe the anime girl video was an edit someone else made on top of an otherwise normal Calif video.

          Still not great though.

        • Hamuko 11 minutes ago
          Not really sure if 3 is correct. Might have been Calif leaks the video -> it goes viral -> people make PoCs based on the video -> Chainguard releases the binary because there seem to be credible PoCs out there (that are not just the Shigure Ui video).
    • arm32 20 minutes ago
      Brain rot is making us incompetent, dangerously impatient, or a mixture of both.
  • bowersbros 44 minutes ago
    Step 1: Ensure that docker images are available when the embargo is released. We're 2 hours in, and they still aren't available.
    • emilburzo 21 minutes ago
      I can empathize with them, this is actually quite difficult when you're an open source project.

      You have your source code public, so you can't commit/push because then you've leaked info.

      Your build pipeline is also likely public, so you can't just build from another source code... source.

      You can create a private repo, but now you also need to build a private build system.

      You don't get the same generous build resources for private repos, so you either:

      a) simplify the build to just the essentials

      b) pay

      Unless you have significant funding, you'll probably go for a).

      Now you have to maintain two systems, also with some differences between them.

      Plus you need a way to get the build artifacts from the private system to the public one, typically at a fixed point in time.

      Any failure/delay (e.g. less powerful build on private repo, errors because you exercise it rarely) causes people to get upset that you didn't respect the announced time.

      Maybe you're also using things like image attestation, another can of worms.

    • fguerraz 18 minutes ago
      I find it incredibly naive that they’d hope it would not leak after weeks/months of embargo.

      Being given advance notice of an upcoming security fix is an immense privilege, organisations should turn around quickly when given such information, they shouldn’t be given more than a couple of days to update IMHO, it’s not like the rest of the world can wait.

    • kyriakos 14 minutes ago
      Aren't those run by docker? php foundation cannot be responsible
    • lol768 26 minutes ago
      The PHP Foundation should manage it, the Docker ""Official" Images" approach clearly just doesn't work properly for responding to vulnerability patches.
    • thinkindie 43 minutes ago
      today I learned that building your image from scratch is fundamental in cases like this. Luckily I came prepared thanks to Claude Code suggestion.
    • eqmvii 29 minutes ago
      Yep, all our efforts are now focused on working around that. It's pretty neat!
    • Droobfest 28 minutes ago
      Never using docker hub ever again
  • dannyw 47 minutes ago
    > As a result of the leak and pre-announcement around 20:00 UTC, Calif, one of the security firms that had reported the issues mistakenly published a video.

    This is the most surprising part to me. It sounds like Calif saw the leaks, interpreted that as embargo being broken, and then raced to publish their [anime dancing] marketing video? I'd have expected much better.

    • bombcar 27 minutes ago
      This is EXACTLY how marketing/pr firms actually coordinate no matter what they SAY.
    • yreg 43 minutes ago
      This is not the dancing anime girl video, is it?
      • atymic 42 minutes ago
        That's the one
  • fg137 20 minutes ago
    > Calif, one of the security firms that had reported the issues mistakenly published a video.

    > Chainguard unilaterally broke the embargo and published built images ...

    Won't be the last time this happens. If there is no consequence of breaking the rules, people will keep doing that.

  • lol768 24 minutes ago
    > The PHP security team closely monitored and inspected appearing PoCs after the leak but did not identify any functional exploits at the time of release/public disclosure

    Okay, but how close did they get? Were they close enough that a determined actor could've (perhaps using an LLM) managed to get to a functioning exploit?

    • Grollicus 16 minutes ago
      I know of a php exploited about 4 hours before their release time 1400 UTC, using the session bug in an exploit that was passed around. I'm really not very much in the loop about cyber security things. What were they monitoring?!
  • bombcar 21 minutes ago
    > The PHP security team, operating on consensus, struggled to choose between these and feared the repercussions of shipping the wrong choice.

    This is the real story. You ship one of them (the breaking change) with —fuck-my-shit-up or something as a compile time option to switch to the other fix.

  • nicce 39 minutes ago
    What is the penalty of breaking the embargo? Not shipping patches anymore beforehand?
    • dannyw 35 minutes ago
      It might make other projects reconsider sharing advanced patches with Chainguard.
  • cubefox 15 minutes ago
    The guy who posted the CVE IDs early: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50183326 (dead comment)
  • ChrisArchitect 28 minutes ago
    Related:

    PHP2Shell: AI uncovers critical RCE in PHP

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50180836

    Patch the Planet: global response coordination as agents uncover critical vulnerabilities

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50181175

    Upcoming critical PHP security release (CVE-2026-109618 / -109619)

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50172041

  • ck2 27 minutes ago
    serious question

    for legacy systems, how difficult would it be for an attacker assisted by "AI" to stage the conditions

    on a scale of 1 (easiest) to 10 (hardest)

  • cubefox 1 hour ago
    Sounds like a lot went wrong, the 2024 issue not being patched and then multiple parties leaking stuff before the scheduled release date.
  • petecooper 48 minutes ago
    >On Tuesday, October 20th, at around 15:00 UTC, the two CVE IDs began circulating on online forums and social media. They came with a wrong release time and a wrong CVSS score of 10.0 (the actual score is 9.2). No technical details leaked.

    This was partly me. I take responsibility for posting it on HN. I am truly sorry for the disruption this has likely caused.

    My contact had informed me there was no embargo, and told me her contact had told her the same. It transpired this morning that was a lie.

    >On October 21st at 07:41 UTC, more than six hours before the coordinated release, Chainguard unilaterally broke the embargo and published built images containing the fix. Like other distributors, Chainguard had received the patch in advance so its users could update the moment the vulnerabilities were disclosed. Any attacker could now study the fix in binary form while every other PHP user was still waiting for the release. This disregarded weeks of work by many parties toward a coordinated disclosure.

    On the plus side, at least I'm not Chainguard. Yikes.

  • georgestones 13 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • schleck8 42 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • snootypoot 29 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • VladDanGeorgesc 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • mschuster91 25 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • charcircuit 25 minutes ago
    >Chainguard unilaterally broke the embargo and published built images containing the fix.

    >This disregarded weeks of work by many parties toward a coordinated disclosure.

    Good. Coordinated disclosure meant that people couldn't protect themselves. That's not a good thing. It meant sites were forced to shut down instead of simply updating.

    • S0y 24 minutes ago
      You need to pay to get access to chainguard images.
      • lrae 20 minutes ago
        They made them available for everyone and free in this case.

        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176735

      • blantonl 20 minutes ago
        That is incredibly damaging to the trust that coordinated vulnerability disclosure depends upon. The obvious consequence is that Chainguard should never again receive embargoed fixes in advance. You don’t get invited back into the room after demonstrating that you can’t be trusted with the information.

        They didn’t get to unilaterally decide that the embargo was inconvenient and publish early.

      • tflinton 11 minutes ago
        No, you don't, you just don't get older patched versions unless you pay.
      • john_strinlai 19 minutes ago
        not the ones related to this