Export limit exceeded: 15179 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 88023 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (88023 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-19913 | 2026-08-26 | 7.5 High | ||
| The Kaltura HTML5 player (mwEmbed / html5lib) contains a local file disclosure vulnerability due to improper validation of the ServiceUrl parameter in mwEmbedLoader.php. This parameter is used as the base URL for a backend request and accepts non‑HTTP schemes such as file://. When an exception or error occurs, the response is subsequently deserialized and its raw contents are reflected to the client in an error message; this enables an unauthenticated, remote attacker to read any arbitrary internal file reachable by the server. Affected versions include html5lib v2.45, v2.103 and earlier, and other v2.x releases exposing the vulnerable endpoint. | ||||
| CVE-2026-80214 | 1 Librenms | 1 Librenms | 2026-08-26 | N/A |
| LibreNMS’s Virtualization Discovery module is vulnerable to command line injection. An authenticated admin user can execute arbitrary code on the host server. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79663 | 2 Ech0, Lin-snow | 2 Ech0, Ech0 | 2026-08-26 | 4.8 Medium |
| Ech0 before 4.7.3 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in the public RSS feed where tag names and markdown content are rendered without HTML escaping. Attackers with admin privileges can inject malicious tag names or raw HTML in echo content that executes as JavaScript in RSS readers that render HTML-type summaries, affecting anonymous subscribers and other users. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78681 | 1 Nltk | 1 Nltk | 2026-08-26 | 7.5 High |
| NLTK versions before 3.10.3 use xml.etree.ElementTree to parse XML in multiple modules, which honors entity declarations in document DTDs. Attackers can craft XML payloads with nested entity declarations that expand from hundreds of bytes to megabytes in memory, causing denial of service. | ||||
| CVE-2026-77088 | 1 Emilstenstrom | 1 Justhtml | 2026-08-26 | 6.1 Medium |
| justhtml versions 0.9.0 through 1.21.0 contain a cross-site scripting vulnerability in to_markdown() where inline code spans fail to account for blank lines as block boundaries. Attackers can inject blank lines into code or pre element text to break the inline span, causing sanitized HTML to be emitted unescaped and re-parsed as live Markdown by compliant renderers. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71943 | 1 Draytek | 14 Vigorswitch Fx2120 Firmware, Vigorswitch G1282 Firmware, Vigorswitch G2100 Firmware and 11 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorSwitch models contain a command injection vulnerability in the setDevNet function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering of the username and password fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71928 | 1 Draytek | 14 Vigorswitch Fx2120 Firmware, Vigorswitch G1282 Firmware, Vigorswitch G2100 Firmware and 11 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorSwitch models contain a command injection vulnerability in the fdftDevice function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering of the username and password fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71923 | 1 Draytek | 14 Vigorswitch Fx2120 Firmware, Vigorswitch G1282 Firmware, Vigorswitch G2100 Firmware and 11 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorSwitch models contain a command injection vulnerability in the auth_set function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering of the username and password fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71918 | 1 Draytek | 14 Vigorswitch Fx2120 Firmware, Vigorswitch G1282 Firmware, Vigorswitch G2100 Firmware and 11 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorSwitch models contain a command injection vulnerability in the webBackupAction function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering of the option, key, pw_encode, pathN, and valueN fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71913 | 1 Draytek | 12 Vigorap 1060c, Vigorap 1060c Firmware, Vigorap 903 and 9 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorAP models contain a command injection vulnerability in the upload_settings.cgi interface. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering before the restorekey field is concatenated into a shell command. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71908 | 1 Draytek | 12 Vigorap 1060c, Vigorap 1060c Firmware, Vigorap 903 and 9 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorAP models contain a command injection vulnerability in the mesh_start_speed_test function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient sanitization of the meshdevice_index and meshdevice_ip fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-56704 | 2 Adminer, Vrana | 2 Adminer, Adminer | 2026-08-26 | 6.1 Medium |
| Adminer before 5.4.3 inserts unsanitized database server version strings into script tags with valid CSP nonces without proper validation. Attackers controlling a rogue MySQL server can return crafted version strings that break out of the JavaScript context and execute arbitrary code, bypassing Content Security Policy protections. | ||||
| CVE-2026-13215 | 1 Zephyrproject | 1 Zephyr | 2026-08-26 | 6.8 Medium |
| The Zephyr ext2 filesystem driver fails to validate the s_log_block_size field of the on-disk superblock when mounting a filesystem. ext2_verify_disk_superblock() in subsys/fs/ext2/ext2_impl.c checks the magic number, revision, inode size and group counts, but never bounds s_log_block_size. On a successful verify, subsys/fs/ext2/ext2_ops.c computes fs->block_size = 1024 << superblock.s_log_block_size from this attacker-controlled uint32_t, so a crafted value either overflows the shift (undefined behaviour) or yields a block size far larger than CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE. That block size is then passed to k_mem_slab_init() by ext2_init_blocks_slab() to carve CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_COUNT blocks out of the fixed static buffer __ext2_block_memory_buffer, whose size is CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_COUNT * CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE. k_mem_slab_init() does not verify that the requested blocks fit the buffer, and the ext2 wrapper discards its return value, so the slab is laid out past the end of the static buffer. The mount immediately reads block-group, bitmap and inode blocks of fs->block_size bytes each into these slab blocks, producing an out-of-bounds write into adjacent static memory on the first block read. The entire path is gated only by data read from the mounted image, making this reachable by any attacker who can present a crafted ext2 image to a device that mounts it (for example a removable SD card or storage medium). Because the ext2 driver runs in kernel mode, supplying image bytes yields a supervisor-mode memory-corruption primitive, with impact ranging from denial of service to potential code execution. The fix rejects s_log_block_size values that overflow the shift (greater than 11) or that produce a block size exceeding CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE, so the block slab can no longer be initialized larger than its backing buffer. | ||||
| CVE-2026-13214 | 1 Zephyrproject | 1 Zephyr | 2026-08-26 | 9.8 Critical |
| The OCPP 1.6 client in subsys/net/lib/ocpp/ocpp_j.c contains a stack buffer overflow in parse_getconfig_msg(). When handling a GetConfiguration request from the central system, the handler copied the attacker-controlled JSON "key" string into the caller's fixed 50-byte stack buffer (skey[CISTR50], declared in subsys/net/lib/ocpp/ocpp.c) using an unbounded strcpy(). The parsed key value points directly into the receive buffer, so its length is bounded only by the message size (CONFIG_OCPP_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE, default 2048). The GetConfiguration message is delivered over the WebSocket connection that the charge point opens to its configured central system. The reader thread ocpp_wsreader() reads the message into ui->recv_buf and dispatches it to parse_getconfig_msg() via the PDU function table. An attacker who controls the central system endpoint, or a man-in-the-middle on an unencrypted connection, can send a GetConfiguration request whose "key" field exceeds 50 bytes and overflow the reader thread's stack with attacker-chosen bytes. The consequence is a remotely triggerable stack smash on the OCPP reader thread: at minimum a denial of service, and plausibly remote code execution depending on build-time hardening such as stack canaries and MPU configuration. The fix replaces the strcpy() with a bounded strncpy(key, payload.key[0], CISTR50 - 1) followed by explicit NUL termination, matching the bounded copies already used by the sibling handlers. | ||||
| CVE-2026-54344 | 1 Tooljet | 1 Tooljet | 2026-08-26 | 4.7 Medium |
| ToolJet is an open-source low-code platform for building internal tools. Prior to 3.20.180, ToolJet's render preview deployment workflow interpolates github.event.comment.body directly into a bash conditional in a run step, allowing any GitHub user who can comment on an open pull request with a deploy command to execute shell commands on the CI runner and exfiltrate deployment secrets. This issue is reported as fixed in version 3.20.180. | ||||
| CVE-2026-4897 | 2 Freedesktop, Redhat | 4 Polkit, Enterprise Linux, Openshift and 1 more | 2026-08-26 | 5.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in polkit. A local user can exploit this by providing a specially crafted, excessively long input to the `polkit-agent-helper-1` setuid binary via standard input (stdin). This unbounded input can lead to an out-of-memory (OOM) condition, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) for the system. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58192 | 1 Appium | 2 Appium, Appium\/storage-plugin | 2026-08-26 | 8.6 High |
| Appium is a cross-platform automation framework for all kinds of apps, built on top of the W3C WebDriver protocol. Prior to 1.1.6, the Appium storage plugin exposes POST /storage/delete, whose handler passes the user-supplied name value directly into path.join(storageRoot, name) and fs.rimraf() without path sanitization, allowing an unauthenticated remote client to escape the storage root with ../ sequences and recursively delete arbitrary writable files or directories. This issue is fixed in version 1.1.6. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76367 | 1 Splunk | 2 Soar, Splunk | 2026-08-26 | 4 Medium |
| In Splunk SOAR versions below 8.6.0, a user who holds the "Incident Commander" Splunk SOAR role could store JavaScript in a note and run it in the browser of another user when that user opens the note. The stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is possible because Splunk SOAR can treat existing note content as Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) without sanitizing that content when the note format changes. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "Incident Commander" Splunk SOAR role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see Manage roles and permissions in Splunk SOAR (Cloud) (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-soar/soar-cloud/administer-soar-cloud/manage-your-splunk-soar-cloud-users-and-accounts/manage-roles-and-permissions-in-splunk-soar-cloud) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76339 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 5.4 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles could inject arbitrary Search Processing Language (SPL) commands through the geostats command. The injected SPL runs with the permissions of another authenticated user after that user initiates the attacker-controlled geostats search in Splunk Web. The injected SPL could expose all relevant data available to the second user, including stored credentials, and modify lookup files that the second user has permission to change. The vulnerability is possible because the geostats command does not sufficiently validate input before Splunk Enterprise processes it. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see geostats (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/spl-search-reference/10.0/search-commands/geostats) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76333 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 7.1 High |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could store a Dashboard Studio workflow action with a crafted Uniform Resource Locator (URL). When another authenticated user selects the stored action from Event Actions and selects Continue, attacker-controlled JavaScript runs in the browser of that user. This could expose data or actions available through Splunk Web to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Dashboard Studio does not sufficiently validate workflow-action URLs before processing them. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "power" Splunk role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see Define roles on the Splunk platform with capabilities (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/manage-users-and-security/10.2/manage-splunk-platform-users-and-roles/define-roles-on-the-splunk-platform-with-capabilities) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||