Export limit exceeded: 416899 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (416899 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-108014 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Domino Server | 2026-10-28 | N/A |
| Private keys for eight eMudhra intermediate CA certificates have been compromised https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/ , which impacts certificate trust for outbound network request features of HCL Domino Server. An unauthenticated network attacker could spoof server certificates to execute a man in the middle (MITM) attack, enabling them to intercept and/or modify the content of outbound TLS connections. | ||||
| CVE-2026-48360 | 1 Adobe | 2 Adobe Connect Android Mobile App, Connect Desktop Application | 2026-10-28 | 9.6 Critical |
| Adobe Connect is affected by an Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must visit a maliciously crafted URL or interact with a compromised web page. Scope is changed. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114595 | 1 The Epics Community | 1 Epics Base | 2026-10-28 | 9.8 Critical |
| In EPICS Base release 7.0.10 and prior, an integer overflow in network request processing can cause memory to be allocated with an incorrect size. Subsequent handling of attacker supplied data may result in memory corruption, denial of service, or potential remote code execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-22063 | 1 Netapp | 3 E-series Santricity Os Controller, Ontap 9, Storagegrid Webscale | 2026-10-28 | N/A |
| The private keys of eight eMudhra intermediate CA certificates have been compromised. eMudhra revoked the eight affected intermediate certificates on October 18, 2026. While this is not a software vulnerability, CVE-2026-22063 has been assigned to track relevant changes in impacted NetApp products. | ||||
| CVE-2026-63286 | 1 Axis Communications Ab | 2 Axis Camera Station, Axis Camera Station Pro | 2026-10-28 | 7.1 High |
| Database backups are vulnerable to offline attacks. Backups created using a version prior to the patched version are still vulnerable. AXIS Camera Station Pro automatically creates one more such backup for recovery purpose when the update is applied. Delete all these backups and change the credentials stored in AXIS Camera Station Pro. | ||||
| CVE-2026-86395 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain Virtual Edition | 2026-10-28 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain Virtual Edition, Feature Release versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.8, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.80, LTS2025 release versions 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.40, LTS2026 release versions 8.6.1.0 through 8.6.1.20, contain an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Command execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-103313 | 1 Wordpress-extensions | 1 Bitpay Gateway For Woocommerce | 2026-10-28 | 5.3 Medium |
| The BitPay Gateway for WooCommerce WordPress plugin through 4.1.3 does not bind the payment provider's transaction confirmation to the order it completes, nor verify the confirmed amount, allowing an unauthenticated attacker who holds a single genuine low-value transaction to mark arbitrary higher-value orders as paid. | ||||
| CVE-2026-103330 | 1 Wordpress-extensions | 1 Sadad Qa Payment | 2026-10-28 | 5.3 Medium |
| The Sadad QA Payment WordPress plugin through 1.28 does not correctly verify the authenticity of incoming payment notifications, as the verification is keyed on a merchant secret that is empty by default and the rest of the signed data is attacker-controlled, allowing unauthenticated attackers to forge a valid confirmation and mark orders as paid without payment. | ||||
| CVE-2026-106648 | 1 Wordpress-extensions | 1 Royal Elementor Addons | 2026-10-28 | 5.3 Medium |
| The Royal Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 1.7.1070 does not validate submitted form field values before substituting them into the recipient addresses of its form notification emails, allowing unauthenticated attackers to replace the recipient list and relay attacker-composed email from the site's own domain when a recipient field is configured to echo a submitted value. | ||||
| CVE-2026-115223 | 1 Wordpress-extensions | 1 Smart Popup By Supsystic | 2026-10-28 | 4.9 Medium |
| The Smart Popup by Supsystic WordPress plugin before 2.0.2 does not prevent template-injection payloads from being stored in a popup text block and later evaluated by its template engine, because the filter meant to strip template delimiters runs before a decoding step that reconstructs them, allowing an authenticated administrator to execute arbitrary template expressions server-side and read PHP constants such as the site's database credentials and authentication keys. | ||||
| CVE-2026-6064 | 1 Gen Digital | 3 Avast Antivirus, Avg Internet Security, Norton Antivirus | 2026-10-28 | 7.3 High |
| Link following vulnerability in Data Shredder components in Norton Antivirus, Avast Antivirus, and AVG Internet Security prior to 26.5.10933 on Windows allows a local, low-privileged attacker to escalate privileges to SYSTEM. During a privileged shred operation, enabling arbitrary file/folder deletion that is leveraged to gain NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM privelages. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67074 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 9.1 Critical |
| HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Remote Code Execution Vulnerability . It may allow attackers to execute code with the privileges of the affected application or service, potentially leading to unauthorized access, data exposure, or system compromise. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67073 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 8.6 High |
| HCL BigFix AEX is affected by an Unrestricted File Upload and Improper Access Control vulnerability. This could allow an attacker to upload malicious or unauthorized files and directly access or download sensitive uploaded content, potentially leading to information disclosure, unauthorized access, or system compromise. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67080 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 6.5 Medium |
| HCL BigFix AEX is affected by an Information Disclosure vulnerability due to improper handling of errors or exceptional conditions. This could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive technical information, including stack traces, system details, or internal paths, potentially facilitating further attacks. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67079 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 6.4 Medium |
| HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Clickjacking vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to embed the application within a malicious web page or iframe and trick users into performing unintended actions, potentially leading to unauthorized transactions or changes to their accounts. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67077 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 4.2 Medium |
| HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to cause the application to send unauthorized requests to external resources. Successful exploitation could lead to access to unintended services, sensitive information disclosure, or unauthorized actions through the affected application. | ||||
| CVE-2026-21830 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Aex | 2026-10-28 | 3.7 Low |
| HCL BigFix AEX product is affected by a vulnerability in the aws-sdk package.. It may cause AWS API requests to be sent to unintended or non‐AWS endpoints. | ||||
| CVE-2026-83525 | 1 Apache | 1 Kafka | 2026-10-28 | N/A |
| Incorrect operator (CWE-480) in the FetchSnapshot RPC handler in Apache Kafka from 2.8.0 before 4.2.2, and from 4.3.0 before 4.3.2 on all platforms allows an authenticated attacker with CLUSTER_ACTION privilege to cause a denial of service (controller process termination) via a crafted FetchSnapshotRequest with an empty topics array or a topic with no partitions. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.2.2, 4.3.2, or 4.4.0, which fix this issue. Users on unsupported branches (4.1.x and earlier) should upgrade to 4.2.2 or later. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110952 | 1 Apache | 1 Kafka | 2026-10-28 | N/A |
| A Kafka broker that authenticates clients with SASL/OAUTHBEARER using the bundled JWKS-backed validator always verifies the JWT signature, but two further checks are only performed when explicitly configured: - The issuer (iss) claim is verified only when sasl.oauthbearer.expected.issuer is set. When it is unset, a validly-signed token carrying the expected audience is accepted regardless of which issuer minted it. - An audience (aud) claim is required only when sasl.oauthbearer.expected.audience is set. When it is unset, a validly-signed token that omits the aud claim is accepted. (A token that carries an aud claim is still rejected when no expected audience is configured.) Both options default to unset and have been documented as optional (Importance LOW) since KIP-768 (3.1.0). Impact: The exposure is realizable mainly in deployments whose JWKS endpoint serves signing keys for more than one issuer (a multi-tenant identity provider, an aggregated/shared JWKS, or shared signing keys): a token minted for a different issuer, or a token lacking an audience, may be accepted to authenticate — potentially as a higher-privileged principal. In a single-issuer deployment where the provider controls the iss claim and issues audience-scoped tokens, exposure is limited. The signature trust anchor remains enforced in all cases. This is distinct from CVE-2026-33557 (acceptance of unsigned/unvalidated tokens); here the signature is validated and only the issuer/audience checks are not enforced by default. Mitigation (all affected versions, no upgrade required): Set both sasl.oauthbearer.expected.issuer (to your provider's exact iss value) and sasl.oauthbearer.expected.audience (to the audience(s) your brokers expect), per listener. Brokers that set these perform exact-match issuer/audience checks and are not affected. Both have been available since 3.1.0. Resolution: - From Apache Kafka 4.4.0: a broker configured with a JWKS endpoint fails to start unless both sasl.oauthbearer.expected.issuer and sasl.oauthbearer.expected.audience are set (secure by default). Deployments that intentionally do not restrict the issuer and/or audience may opt out per axis with sasl.oauthbearer.allow.unverified.issuer=true and/or sasl.oauthbearer.allow.unverified.audience=true. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110985 | 1 Apache | 1 Kafka | 2026-10-28 | N/A |
| A Kafka broker using SASL/OAUTHBEARER with the default validator (sasl.oauthbearer.jwt.validator.class=DefaultJwtValidator) selects its implementation from configuration. When sasl.oauthbearer.jwks.endpoint.url is set, the validator verifies the JWT signature. When that URL is unset (the default) and no verification key resolver is supplied, DefaultJwtValidator silently falls back to ClientJwtValidator, which does not verify the JWT signature, algorithm, or issuer - and the broker starts with no warning or error. This is the residual of CVE-2026-33557, whose fix restored signature verification only on the path where the JWKS endpoint URL is set. Impact: A broker in this state accepts any structurally valid JWT, including "alg":"none" tokens. An unauthenticated remote attacker who can reach the listener can forge a token asserting any principal - including configured superusers - and gain full access to the cluster. Only brokers that enable SASL/OAUTHBEARER validation without a JWKS endpoint URL (and without a custom verification key resolver) are affected; brokers that set the URL verify signatures and are not affected. Unlike CVE-2026-110952 (issuer/audience not enforced by default), here no signature is verified at all. Mitigation (all affected versions, no upgrade required): Set sasl.oauthbearer.jwks.endpoint.url for every listener/mechanism that uses OAuthBearerValidatorCallbackHandler, or configure a signature-verifying sasl.oauthbearer.jwt.validator.class. Resolution: From Apache Kafka 4.2.2, 4.3.1, and 4.4.0: a broker that would fall back to the non-verifying ClientJwtValidator fails to start with a ConfigException instead of running without signature verification (secure by default). | ||||