Export limit exceeded: 16894 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (16894 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-55384 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| InvoiceShelf is an open-source web & mobile app that helps track expenses, payments and create professional invoices and estimates. Prior to version 2.4.0, InvoiceShelf invoice, estimate, and recurring-invoice creation paths accept client-supplied total, sub_total, tax, discount_val, and due_amount values without verifying that they match the submitted line items. An authenticated user can persist manipulated financial totals through InvoicesRequest::getInvoicePayload and the corresponding EstimatesRequest and RecurringInvoiceRequest handlers, causing stored document totals to disagree with their item prices and quantities. This issue is fixed in version 2.4.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-77096 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| CVFS contained a missing authentication condition affecting command execution. Software customers upgrade to resolved maintenance release. Update CVFS. | ||||
| CVE-2026-86362 | 1 Dell | 1 System Update | 2026-10-14 | 8.2 High |
| Dell System Update, versions prior to 2.3.0.0, contains an Improper Access Control vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-85865 | 1 Microsoft | 8 Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809, Windows Server 2012 and 5 more | 2026-10-14 | 5.5 Medium |
| Improper authentication in Windows DHCP Server allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally. | ||||
| CVE-2026-21848 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Bigfix Service Management | 2026-10-14 | 5 Medium |
| HCL BigFix Service Management is affected by a Security Misconfiguration vulnerability, which could allow an authenticated attacker to exploit improper access controls, enabling the unauthorized viewing of restricted data elements across tenant boundaries. | ||||
| CVE-2026-101954 | 2026-10-14 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| An Improper Authentication vulnerability in the J-Web management interface and its NETCONF session handling of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated network attacker to obtain root-level device configuration access and take over the device via a reachable J-Web HTTP or HTTPS service when web management is enabled. | ||||
| CVE-2026-83787 | 1 Microsoft | 8 Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809, Windows Server 2012 and 5 more | 2026-10-14 | 5.5 Medium |
| Insufficient verification of data authenticity in Windows DHCP Server allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110130 | 1 Finsys | 1 Dockhand | 2026-10-14 | 10 Critical |
| Dockhand before 1.0.45 contains an authentication bypass in which the global auth hook skips authentication for any path ending in a static-asset extension such as .js, including /api/* routes, and the user-mutation handlers fail open for unauthenticated callers. Unauthenticated remote attackers can send a PUT request to /api/users/<id>.js to reset the admin's or any user's password and take over the account. | ||||
| CVE-2022-32207 | 7 Apple, Debian, Fedoraproject and 4 more | 21 Macos, Debian Linux, Fedora and 18 more | 2026-10-14 | 9.8 Critical |
| When curl < 7.84.0 saves cookies, alt-svc and hsts data to local files, it makes the operation atomic by finalizing the operation with a rename from a temporary name to the final target file name.In that rename operation, it might accidentally *widen* the permissions for the target file, leaving the updated file accessible to more users than intended. | ||||
| CVE-2022-28321 | 2 Linux-pam, Opensuse | 2 Linux-pam, Tumbleweed | 2026-10-14 | 9.8 Critical |
| The Linux-PAM package before 1.5.2-6.1 for openSUSE Tumbleweed allows authentication bypass for SSH logins. The pam_access.so module doesn't correctly restrict login if a user tries to connect from an IP address that is not resolvable via DNS. In such conditions, a user with denied access to a machine can still get access. NOTE: the relevance of this issue is largely limited to openSUSE Tumbleweed and openSUSE Factory; it does not affect Linux-PAM upstream. | ||||
| CVE-2014-7810 | 4 Apache, Debian, Hp and 1 more | 5 Tomcat, Debian Linux, Hp-ux and 2 more | 2026-10-14 | N/A |
| The Expression Language (EL) implementation in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.44, 7.x before 7.0.58, and 8.x before 8.0.16 does not properly consider the possibility of an accessible interface implemented by an inaccessible class, which allows attackers to bypass a SecurityManager protection mechanism via a web application that leverages use of incorrect privileges during EL evaluation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71301 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's repository markup endpoint resolves same-repository pull request references without enforcing the viewer's Pull Requests permission. A member with only Wiki access to a private repository can submit a markup preview request and retrieve a private pull request's title and state icon despite lacking Issues and Pull Requests access. This exposes pull request metadata across repository unit permissions. | ||||
| CVE-2026-68964 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's user SSH and GPG key-list API endpoints omit the profile visibility check applied by their web equivalents. A restricted account can retrieve public keys, key titles, fingerprints, and GPG-embedded email addresses belonging to Limited-visibility users. The disclosure concerns public key material and associated metadata, not private cryptographic keys. | ||||
| CVE-2026-68957 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's API and web issue-search paths do not treat restricted accounts as anonymous viewers when evaluating Limited-visibility repository owners. A restricted user can search and retrieve issue titles and bodies that should be hidden by the owner's visibility policy. Keyword matching can also reveal that hidden issue content or comments contain a supplied term. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67577 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's activity-feed and contribution-heatmap API handlers do not apply the profile visibility check for restricted accounts viewing Limited-visibility users. A restricted user can retrieve activity records and contribution timestamps that the corresponding profile routes deny. Exposed activity can include repository names, commit messages, and issue or pull request events associated with qualifying public-repository activity. | ||||
| CVE-2026-66877 | 2026-10-14 | 8.1 High | ||
| Gitea enforces first-time fork contributor approval by blocking jobs, but some job transition and dispatch paths do not re-check the run's approval requirement. A separate run sharing a job-level concurrency group can cancel a pending job and cause its blocked sibling jobs to be re-emitted and dispatched without approval. This allows unreviewed workflow code to execute on self-hosted runners; fork secrets remain withheld and the run token remains read-only. | ||||
| CVE-2026-66874 | 2026-10-14 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| For pull request events, Gitea reads workflow definitions from the pull request head and posts a synthetic skipped status when workflow branch or path filters exclude execution. A fork pull request author can supply a workflow matching a required status context but deliberately prevent it from running. Because skipped statuses count as success, branch protection or organization-required workflow checks can appear satisfied without the mandated workflow executing; no runner or maintainer approval is required for this path. | ||||
| CVE-2026-66849 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's package registry grants authenticated users read access to packages owned by Limited-visibility users without excluding restricted accounts. A restricted user can enumerate and download those packages despite the visibility policy that should prevent this access. The issue affects user-owned package registries and exposes package contents across the intended authorization boundary. | ||||
| CVE-2026-63792 | 2026-10-14 | 5.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's collaborative-owner authorization path for reading cross-repository reusable workflows does not exclude fork pull request runs. An approved fork workflow targeting a private repository can read workflow files from another private repository that trusts the base repository's owner through collaborative-owner configuration. The issue exposes private reusable workflow contents at caller-selected Git refs; it does not itself grant write access or code execution in the other repository. | ||||
| CVE-2026-59766 | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Gitea's starred-repository and tracked-time API endpoints do not re-check current repository permissions before returning data associated with the requesting user. A user whose access to a private repository has been revoked can still retrieve repository metadata through /api/v1/user/starred and private issue titles through /api/v1/user/times. The disclosure depends on relationships or tracked-time entries created before access was revoked. | ||||