ITitvision·May 5, 2026
Exploit download/source: https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/blob/m...
The dedicated website: https://copy.fail
In CVE-2026-31431: Copy Fail vs. rootless containerstheori-io
copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431
Python2026–2026
theori-io / copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431
copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431
Copy Fail (CVE-2026-31431): 9-year-old Linux kernel LPE found by Theori's Xint Code
4Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
4.1KGitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Copy Fail (CVE-2026-31431): 9-year-old Linux kernel LPE found by Theori's Xint Code
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by 6-hour interval5 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2026-04-29 19:30:49 UTC to 2026-05-05 11:42:24 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 18:00 | 2026-04-29 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-04-30 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Apr 30, 00:00 | 2026-04-30 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-04-30 06:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Apr 30, 06:00 | 2026-04-30 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-04-30 12:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Apr 30, 12:00 | 2026-04-30 12:00:00 UTC | 2026-04-30 18:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Apr 30, 18:00 | 2026-04-30 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| May 1, 00:00 | 2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-01 06:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 1, 06:00 | 2026-05-01 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-01 12:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 1, 12:00 | 2026-05-01 12:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-01 18:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 1, 18:00 | 2026-05-01 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-02 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2, 00:00 | 2026-05-02 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-02 06:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2, 06:00 | 2026-05-02 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-02 12:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2, 12:00 | 2026-05-02 12:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-02 18:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2, 18:00 | 2026-05-02 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-03 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 3, 00:00 | 2026-05-03 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-03 06:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 3, 06:00 | 2026-05-03 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-03 12:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 3, 12:00 | 2026-05-03 12:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-03 18:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 3, 18:00 | 2026-05-03 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 4, 00:00 | 2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-04 06:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 4, 06:00 | 2026-05-04 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-04 12:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 4, 12:00 | 2026-05-04 12:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-04 18:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 4, 18:00 | 2026-05-04 18:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-05 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 5, 00:00 | 2026-05-05 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-05 06:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 5, 06:00 | 2026-05-05 06:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-05 12:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
5 sourcesThere was some discussion on the GitHub issues about workarounds to disable it, even though it is baked in.
https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/issues...
https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/issues...
In For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributionsYes, strongly agree.
This is HUGE news, I would have skimmed over "Copy Fail".
The blog post might be a better place to link to also, it has more details on the exploit.
https://xint.io/blog/copy-fail-linux-distributions
There are also some good threads on which distros are vulnerable and mitigations on the github page.
https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/issues
In Copy FailIt looks like this is legit, but the script is very phishy and I wouldn't run it in unvirtualized or disposable systems.
https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/blob/m...
>zlib.decompress(d("78daab77f57163626464800126063b0610af82c101cc7760c0040e0c160c301d209a154d16999e07e5c1680601086578c0f0ff864c7e568f5e5b7e10f75b9675c44c7e56c3ff593611fcacfa499979fac5190c0c0c0032c310d3"))
This is not source code, this is binary, it's entirely possible that this contains a script that downloads another malicious script (or that simply contains the malicious commands)
That said, I understand why a terser script might have been prioritized.
EDIT: There's a couple of C ports in the comments that contain more details and no compressed payloads.
In Copy FailThe fetishism of "byte count" (here, as "732 byte python script") needs to stop, especially when in a context like this where they're trying to illustrate a real failure modality.
Looking at their source code [1] it starts with this simple line:
import os as g,zlib,socket as s
And already I'm perplexed. "os as g"? but we're not aliasing "zlib as z"? Clearly this is auto-generated by some kind of minimizer? Likely because zlib is called only once, and os multiple times. As a code author/reviewer, I would never write "os as g" and I would absolutely never approve review of any code that used this.
Anyway, I could go on. :) Let's just stop fetishizing byte count
[1] https://github.com/theori-io/copy-fail-CVE-2026-31431/blob/m...
In Copy Fail