Export limit exceeded: 403646 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (403646 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-62041 | 2026-10-09 | 5.4 Medium | ||
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Ashok Dudhat WP Event Manager wp-event-manager allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects WP Event Manager: from n/a through 3.4.1. | ||||
| CVE-2026-62042 | 2026-10-09 | 5.3 Medium | ||
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in unFocus Projects Scripts n Styles scripts-n-styles allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Scripts n Styles: from n/a through 3.5.8. | ||||
| CVE-2026-39717 | 2026-10-09 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in ThimPress LearnPress learnpress allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects LearnPress: from n/a through 4.4.10. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107419 | 2026-10-09 | 5.4 Medium | ||
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Cool Plugins AI Translation for Polylang automatic-translations-for-polylang allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects AI Translation for Polylang: from n/a through 1.6.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-39725 | 2026-10-09 | N/A | ||
| This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. Duplicate to CVE-2026-1829. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78024 | 2026-10-09 | 7.7 High | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Protection mechanism bypass, Server-side request forgery, and Unauthorized access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78027 | 2026-10-09 | 5.8 Medium | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure and Server-side request forgery. | ||||
| CVE-2026-86851 | 2026-10-09 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| The Livees Checkout WordPress plugin through 7.0.2 does not perform any capability, nonce or order-key check before acting on request parameters on the order confirmation page, allowing unauthenticated users to change the status of arbitrary orders, store arbitrary data and notes on them, and recover their order keys. | ||||
| CVE-2026-85348 | 2026-10-09 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| The GDPR Data Request Form WordPress plugin through 1.7.1 does not have CSRF protection when updating one of its settings, allowing attackers to change that setting via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2026-89235 | 2026-10-09 | 6.8 Medium | ||
| The Testimonials by BestWebSoft WordPress plugin through 1.0.8 does not sanitise and escape a parameter before using it in a SQL query, allowing unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL to the query. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104635 | 1 Elixir-protobuf | 1 Protobuf | 2026-10-09 | 5.9 Medium |
| Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in Protobuf.JSON.Decode in elixir-protobuf protobuf allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to crash the decoding process via a deeply nested JSON document. Any application that decodes attacker-supplied JSON with Protobuf.JSON.decode/3, Protobuf.JSON.decode!/3, or Protobuf.JSON.from_decoded/3 into a schema that contains a self-referential or cyclic message type is affected. In lib/protobuf/json/decode.ex, the embedded-message clause of decode_singular/3 recurses into internal_from_json_data/3 once per nesting level without incrementing or checking the decoder's depth counter. The depth guard increase_depth_and_maybe_throw/1 covers only the Google.Protobuf.ListValue and Google.Protobuf.Struct clauses, so the recursion_limit option has no effect on user-defined message types. Each nesting level allocates a stack frame and heap objects, and a sufficiently deep document exhausts the memory of the decoding process. Confidentiality and integrity are not affected. This issue affects protobuf: from 0.8.0 before 0.17.1. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78016 | 2026-10-09 | 3.1 Low | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information exposure and Information tampering. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78018 | 2026-10-09 | 6.3 Medium | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Initialization of a Resource with an Insecure Default vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78020 | 2026-10-09 | 7.5 High | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Denial of service, Information disclosure, and Remote execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78021 | 2026-10-09 | 3.7 Low | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure and Information exposure. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78023 | 2026-10-09 | 7.1 High | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78025 | 2026-10-09 | 7.5 High | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Missing Authentication for Critical Function vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Protection mechanism bypass, and Unauthorized access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78026 | 2026-10-09 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-78339 | 2026-10-09 | 6.3 Medium | ||
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Protection mechanism bypass, and Unauthorized access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71884 | 1 Legion Of The Bouncy Castle Inc. | 1 Bc-lts-java | 2026-10-09 | N/A |
| In Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.13, the native one-shot CTR packet cipher did not check that the requested input length fitted the counter space the IV left. In CTR mode the IV and the block counter share one 16-byte block, so an IV of 13 to 15 bytes leaves a counter of only 1 to 3 bytes, addressing 256, 65536 or 16777216 blocks respectively. Given a longer input the counter wrapped and the keystream repeated from the start of the same packet, and the call then returned the full input length as though every byte had been correctly transformed. Two segments of the message were therefore encrypted under the same keystream, so their plaintexts can be recovered from the ciphertext alone, without the key, while the caller saw neither an exception nor a short length to indicate it. The streaming implementation validates at init and again while processing, and the portable AESCTRPacketCipher rejects such a request with "Counter in CTR/SIC mode out of range.", but the native one-shot path has a single entry point and performed no counter-range validation there. It now preflights the IV-derived counter range and rejects an over-long request before any output is written, so the operation is failure-atomic and never reports success for bytes it did not correctly transform. A counter of four bytes or more cannot be exhausted by a Java int length and is unaffected, as is a full 16-byte IV, where the counter range is the caller's responsibility. Bouncy Castle for Java (bcprov) is not affected, as it ships no native implementations. | ||||