Export limit exceeded: 387012 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (96491 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-63072 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based on querying the unwrapped key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive can write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports, causing an 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write. Impact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message can trigger a deterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it with CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write Description: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire. CMS unwrapping allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers. An attacker can take a legitimate message and change a single OID byte to select the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since the unwrap key is derived from the recipient's private operation (ECDH key agreement or ML-KEM decapsulation), the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot pass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure. The write is a fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow immediately past the allocation, requires no special configuration, and is reachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is a heap corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code sizes the unwrap output buffer for the worst case so a failed unwrap cannot write past the allocation. FIPS impact: no As the CMS code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2026-63075 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| Issue summary: When OpenSSL processes QUIC traffic from a peer that repeatedly sends ack-eliciting packets while not acknowledging ACK-only responses, the QUIC stack can retain ACK-only packet metadata for the lifetime of the connection. Impact summary: A remote peer that can complete a QUIC handshake can cause connection-scoped memory growth which may lead to Denial of Service through memory exhaustion, especially with sustained traffic or many concurrent QUIC connections. CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling Description: When the OpenSSL QUIC stack sends an ACK-only packet, there is no requirement by the QUIC protocol that the peer will acknowledge that ACK-only packet (i.e. it is itself not ack-eliciting). However, the OpenSSL implementation stores the metadata about the ACK frames regardless. In and of itself that's ok, but if a malicious peer establishes a connection, and then drives the connection such that ACK-only packets are forced from the OpenSSL implementation peer (i.e., by sending numerous PING frames), and then withholding any subsequent acks for ack-eliciting data, like legitimate data, said malicious peer can force inappropriate memory growth on the OpenSSL peer, potentially leading to a Denial of Service. The fix is to ensure that we account for the transmission of the ACK-only packet in the packet histories high and low watermark without actually storing the ACK-only packet metadata itself. FIPS impact: no The OpenSSL FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC code is outside the FIPS module boundary. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9128 | 1 Rockwellautomation | 1 Studio 5000 Logix Designer | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| A code execution security issue exists within Studio 5000 Logix Designer® due to an unquoted search path in the External Tools configuration. The executable paths specified in the external tools configuration file are not properly quoted, and because these paths contain spaces, the operating system may resolve them to unintended executables placed earlier in the search order. If exploited, an attacker could plant a malicious executable in a location within the search path, resulting in arbitrary code execution with the same permissions of the user running the application. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9108 | 1 Rockwellautomation | 1 Studio 5000 Logix Designer | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| A path traversal security issue exists within Studio 5000 Logix Designer® due to improper limitation of file paths within ACD project files. The software does not sanitize or validate file names embedded in the ACD file structure during the project opening procedure, allowing path traversal sequences to escape the intended extraction directory. If exploited, an attacker could craft a malicious ACD project file that results in arbitrary files being written to attacker-controlled locations on the file system, potentially leading to code execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-9127 | 1 Rockwellautomation | 1 Studio 5000 Logix Designer | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| A remote code execution security issue exists within Studio 5000 Logix Designer® due to incorrect authorization on a configuration file. This can allow any authenticated user to modify the paths of external tools configured within the application. If exploited, an attacker could alter the configuration to point to a malicious executable, resulting in arbitrary code execution when any user interacts with the external tools functionality. | ||||
| CVE-2026-19654 | 2 Redhat, Rsyslog | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rsyslog | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| A unauthenticated remote peer may lead rsyslogd to crash due to a flaw in the optional imptcp module. A crafted input sequence during oversize-frame recovery can cause an invalid internal message length and terminate rsyslogd. No confidentiality or integrity impact, privilege escalation, or code execution has been identified. imtcp and the default imptcp framing modes are not affected. | ||||
| CVE-2026-63076 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| Issue summary: OpenSSL CMP password based protection verification only checks whether the protectionAlg parameter was not NULL and not its ASN.1 type, before treating it as a PBMParameter. A crafted message can contain a parameter of a different type, which is then dereferenced as an invalid pointer. Impact summary: A remote, unauthenticated attacker can crash an application acting as a CMP server that accepts PBM-protected messages, or a CMP client talking to a malicious or intercepted CMP server, resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference Description: When verifying the password-based MAC protection of a CMP message, OpenSSL library reads the protectionAlg algorithm parameter with X509_ALGOR_get0(), which returns both the parameter type and its value pointer. The value is then cast to an ASN1_STRING and treated as the expected PBMParameter after only checking that pointer is not NULL. The parameter type returned by X509_ALGOR_get0() was never consulted. This happens during protection verification, before any MAC is computed, so no knowledge of the PBM shared secret is required; the only precondition is that PBM verification is reachable. On the server side this is reached from OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request() for any application that stands up a CMP server accepting PBM-protected messages, and on the client side from CMP response validation against a malicious or on-path (MITM) server. The reliable consequence is a denial of service; there is no memory disclosure, no controlled memory write, and no path to code execution. CMP is a specialized feature that an application must explicitly enable. FIPS impact: no As the CMP code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2026-55532 | 1 Mervinpraison | 1 Praisonai | 2026-08-25 | 7.6 High |
| PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to praisonai 4.6.58, MCP HTTP Stream _validate_origin uses request_origin.startswith(allowed), allowing the attacker-controlled localhost.attacker.com HTTP origin to satisfy the localhost allowlist. A webpage can send Content-Type: text/plain requests without preflight and invoke tools/call without an API key, including file writes that persist agent instructions. This issue is fixed in version 4.6.58. | ||||
| CVE-2026-77236 | 2 Amazon, Freertos | 2 Freertos, Freertos-kernel | 2026-08-25 | 7.3 High |
| Missing minimum size validation in secure context allocation in FreeRTOS-Kernel before 11.3.1 might allow local users to corrupt secure-world heap metadata via an out-of-bounds write with an undersized stack size parameter. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 11.3.1 or later. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76023 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.8 High |
| Improper resource control in Linux Toolkit Theming in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76022 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.8 High |
| Buffer overflow in Network in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76021 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.8 High |
| Use after free in DOM in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76020 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 7.5 High |
| Race condition in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76019 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.1 High |
| Incorrect authorization in Workers in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process and leveraged social engineering to bypass web origin policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76018 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.8 High |
| Privilege elevation in Import in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker leveraging social engineering to potentially execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a crafted file. (Chromium security severity: High) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76017 | 1 Google | 1 Chrome | 2026-08-25 | 8.8 High |
| Use after free in Chromoting in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.173 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via crafted network traffic. (Chromium security severity: Critical) | ||||
| CVE-2026-76387 | 1 Splunk | 1 Enterprise Security | 2026-08-25 | 8.1 High |
| In Splunk Enterprise Security versions below 8.6.1, a user who holds a Splunk Enterprise Security role that contains the mc_investigation_read capability could inject Search Processing Language (SPL) through Analyst Queue search filters, allowing for access to all relevant data and system integrity available to the scheduled searches that run for that user. The vulnerability is possible because the Analyst Queue search filter handling does not validate filter field names before the fields are included in SPL searches. For more information see Users and roles for Splunk Enterprise Security (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise-security-8/install/8.4/installation/users-and-roles-for-splunk-enterprise-security), Manage analyst workflows using the analyst queue in Splunk Enterprise Security (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise-security-8/administer/8.4/mission-control/manage-analyst-workflows-using-the-analyst-queue-in-splunk-enterprise-security), and Overview of Mission Control in Splunk Enterprise Security (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise-security-8/user-guide/8.5/mission-control/overview-of-mission-control-in-splunk-enterprise-security) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76388 | 1 Splunk | 1 Enterprise Security | 2026-08-25 | 8.1 High |
| In Splunk Enterprise Security versions below 8.6.1, a user who holds the ess_analyst Splunk Enterprise Security role could change User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) search macros that scheduled searches run with administrator permissions, allowing for access to all relevant data and system integrity through those searches. The vulnerability is possible because the UEBA app metadata grants analyst roles write access to search macros that should be writable only by administrator roles. For more information see Users and roles for Splunk Enterprise Security (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise-security-8/install/8.4/installation/users-and-roles-for-splunk-enterprise-security) and Roles and knowledge objects in UEBA for Splunk Enterprise Security (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise-security-8/administer/8.5/user-and-entity-behavior-analytics/roles-and-knowledge-objects-in-ueba-for-splunk-enterprise-security) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-61170 | 1 Oracle | 2 Agile Plm, Agile Product Lifecycle Management | 2026-08-25 | 8.1 High |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Agile PLM product of Oracle Supply Chain (component: Security). The supported version that is affected is 9.3.6. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle Agile PLM. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle Agile PLM. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.1 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). | ||||
| CVE-2026-61173 | 1 Oracle | 2 Agile Plm, Agile Product Lifecycle Management | 2026-08-25 | 7.4 High |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Agile PLM product of Oracle Supply Chain (component: Security). The supported version that is affected is 9.3.6. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle Agile PLM. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized creation, deletion or modification access to critical data or all Oracle Agile PLM accessible data as well as unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Oracle Agile PLM accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 7.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N). | ||||