Export limit exceeded: 105069 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (105069 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-108185 | 1 Zoom Communications | 1 Zoom Clients | 2026-10-13 | 7.4 High |
| Improper certificate validation in the My Notes feature of certain Zoom Clients may allow an unauthenticated user to conduct an information disclosure via network access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-86684 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-10-13 | 7.1 High |
| The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process. | ||||
| CVE-2026-53420 | 1 Zoom Communications | 1 Zoom Workplace | 2026-10-13 | 8 High |
| Buffer overflow in a Zoom Phone feature of Zoom Workplace Clients may allow an unauthenticated user to conduct a escalation of privilege via network access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-108381 | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High | ||
| dataclasses-avroschema generates Avro schemas from Python dataclasses, Pydantic models, and Faust Records and generates Python code from Avro schemas. From version 0.44.0 through 0.70.5, the Pydantic and AvroDantic model generators insert a schema field's pydantic-class value after pydantic. in a generated field annotation without safely restricting the expression. Because annotations are evaluated when the generated module is imported, a crafted value can execute arbitrary Python code. Version 0.70.6 fixes the vulnerability by restricting the value to a bare name or a call to a bare name with literal arguments. | ||||
| CVE-2026-108379 | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High | ||
| dataclasses-avroschema generates Avro schemas from Python dataclasses, Pydantic models, and Faust Records and generates Python code from Avro schemas. From version 0.38.0 through 0.70.5, BaseGenerator.parse_fixed inserts a fixed type's namespace value between quotes inside a generated types.confixed annotation without escaping or validating it. A crafted quote can terminate the namespace string and alter the surrounding annotation expression, which Python evaluates when the generated class is defined, allowing arbitrary code execution. Version 0.70.6 fixes the vulnerability by requiring the namespace to be a dot-separated sequence of valid Avro names. | ||||
| CVE-2026-16516 | 2 Wolfssh, Wolfssl | 2 Wolfssh, Wolfssh | 2026-10-13 | 7.4 High |
| wolfSSH does not validate that the ECDSA curve identifier in a KEXDH_REPLY host key blob matches the algorithm negotiated during key exchange. In ParseECCPubKey() (src/internal.c), the blob's algorithm string is used to derive the curve via NameToId/wcPrimeForId without checking against the negotiated ssh->handshake->pubKeyId, and the RFC 5656 curve identifier string is discarded via GetSkip() rather than compared. An active network man-in-the-middle attacker can substitute a host key blob containing a different ECDSA curve, causing the client to import the key on the wrong curve. Because the attacker controls the private key for the substituted curve, signature verification passes. Exploitation requires an active MitM position and a lax public key check callback (e.g., TOFU, algorithm-name-only check, or fingerprint match against the parsed key). | ||||
| CVE-2020-9287 | 1 Fortinet | 2 Forticlient Emergency Management Server, Forticlientems | 2026-10-13 | 7.5 High |
| A untrusted search path vulnerability in Fortinet may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via network exploitable | ||||
| CVE-2020-9290 | 1 Fortinet | 3 Forticlient, Forticlient Virtual Private Network, Forticlientwindows | 2026-10-13 | 7.1 High |
| A untrusted search path vulnerability in Fortinet may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via network exploitable | ||||
| CVE-2019-5589 | 1 Fortinet | 2 Forticlient, Forticlientwindows | 2026-10-13 | 8.6 High |
| A untrusted search path vulnerability in Fortinet may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via network exploitable | ||||
| CVE-2026-83540 | 2 Wolfssh, Wolfssl | 2 Wolfssh, Wolfssh | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| When password or public key authentication is used with the Windows port of wolfSSHd, the Windows logon token acquired for one authenticated connection is not released before a token is acquired for a subsequent connection, resulting in user login poisoning between connections. A less privileged user with a valid account on the server can exploit this to force a login as a more privileged user. The vulnerability was introduced with the initial Windows port of wolfSSHd in wolfSSH version 1.4.15 and affects all versions through 1.5.0. Non-Windows builds of wolfSSHd are not affected. | ||||
| CVE-2026-11731 | 1 Netgear | 3 Rax28, Rax29, Rax30 | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| An authentication bypass vulnerability in the listed NETGEAR RAX series models allows an unauthenticated attacker with adjacent access to the affected device’s management service to access certain device information or modify administrative settings. This vulnerability may impact the confidentiality and integrity of management data and the availability of device-management functions. | ||||
| CVE-2026-11732 | 1 Netgear | 4 Cax30, Rax30, Rax5 and 1 more | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| An insufficient input validation vulnerability in the website blocking feature (Block Sites) of the listed NETGEAR router models allows a network-adjacent attacker having network access (such as WiFi credentials) to run unauthorized commands on the router. This vulnerability could affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected router. It applies only when the Block Sites feature is turned on. | ||||
| CVE-2026-108184 | 1 Zoom Communications | 1 Zoom Clients | 2026-10-13 | 7.4 High |
| Improper certificate validation in certain Zoom Clients for Windows may allow an unauthenticated user to conduct an information disclosure via network access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-87682 | 2 Broadcom, Brocade | 2 Fabric Operating System, Fabric Os | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| Multiple OS Command Injection vulnerabilities exist in the management interface and session processing routines of Brocade Fabric OS versions before 10.0.1. Input processing flaws during remote management connection validation and session verification for directory-based user accounts allow untrusted input containing shell metacharacters to reach internal system execution wrappers. An authenticated user or a compromised directory service account can exploit these vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary operating system commands with elevated privileges on the target device. | ||||
| CVE-2026-87683 | 2 Broadcom, Brocade | 2 Fabric Operating System, Fabric Os | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| Multiple stack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in the REST API management component of Brocade Fabric OS versions prior to 10.0.1. When processing API request payloads (such as device configuration attributes or port mapping requests) the REST API service fails to properly validate incoming array counts and string lengths against internal buffer capacities. An authenticated attacker with REST API access can transmit crafted, oversized request parameters to induce memory corruption on the execution stack. This may result in a denial-of-service condition (daemon crash) or potential arbitrary code execution within the management process context. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104626 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| A user who can open a fork pull request can place workflow content with a shared run-level concurrency group into a Gitea Actions run that is awaiting approval. When a later run in that group cancels the blocked job, the run becomes terminal while still marked as needing approval. If a maintainer later approves the run, Gitea passed the already-cancelled job back through concurrency preparation, set it to waiting, and made it claimable by a matching runner, executing fork-controlled workflow code. Exploitation requires the maintainer's later approval action, Actions to be enabled, and a runner that accepts the repository's jobs. | ||||
| CVE-2026-87665 | 2 Broadcom, Brocade | 2 Fabric Operating System, Fabric Os | 2026-10-13 | 7.5 High |
| A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) protocol handler on Brocade Fabric OS versions before 10.0.1. The vulnerability occurs when processing initial IKE key exchange requests on extension switches or blades running IPsec-enabled Fibre Channel over IP (FCIP) circuits. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending a single, specifically crafted UDP packet (Port 500) containing an oversized Nonce payload. Successful exploitation results in a denial of service (data-plane process crash) | ||||
| CVE-2026-108376 | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High | ||
| dataclasses-avroschema generates Avro schemas from Python dataclasses, Pydantic models, and Faust Records and generates Python code from Avro schemas. From version 0.47.3 through 0.70.5, FieldRepresentation.get_field_default inserts a schema-controlled referenced record name into the callable position of a generated default_factory lambda without validating it as an Avro name. A crafted record name can become an arbitrary Python expression that executes when an instance of the generated model consumes the field default. Version 0.70.6 fixes the vulnerability by rejecting record names that do not match the Avro name grammar. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104632 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-10-13 | 8.8 High |
| Gitea Actions blocks the jobs of workflow runs from first-time fork pull request contributors until a maintainer approves the run. The rerun path only required a run to be finished and built the new attempt's jobs without considering the pending approval, so when a user with Actions write access cancelled a run that was awaiting approval and then re-ran it, the new jobs were created as waiting rather than blocked while the run still recorded that approval was required. Cancelling and re-running stale fork checks is a routine action that does not involve the approval control, so where Actions is enabled and a matching runner is registered, workflow code taken from the fork pull request head could run on the repository's runners without an explicit approval. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104636 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-10-13 | 7.5 High |
| Gitea validated the initial remote URL for push mirrors, wiki remote checks, and fetches of migrated pull request heads, but the subsequent raw Git operations followed HTTP redirects without revalidating the destination. A repository administrator using a policy-allowed endpoint that redirects could make Gitea's Git client send requests to an address that the outbound host policy would otherwise block. The impact depends on the configured policy and the internal services reachable from the server. | ||||