Export limit exceeded: 46110 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (1638 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-44523 | 1 Enchant97 | 1 Note-mark | 2026-05-15 | 10 Critical |
| Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4. | ||||
| CVE-2026-45028 | 2 Astro, Withastro | 2 Astro, Astro | 2026-05-14 | 6.1 Medium |
| Astro is a web framework. Astro versions prior to 6.1.10 used AES-GCM encryption to protect the confidentiality and integrity of server island props and slots parameters, but did not bind the ciphertext to its intended component or parameter type. An attacker could replay one component's encrypted props (p) value as another component's slots (s) value, or vice versa. Since slots contain raw unescaped HTML while props may contain user-controlled values, this could lead to XSS in applications. This occurs when the application uses server islands, two different server island components share the same key name for a prop and a slot, and an attacker has full control over the value of the overlapping prop (requires a dynamically rendered page). This vulnerability is fixed in 6.1.10. | ||||
| CVE-2026-44467 | 1 Anthropics | 1 Claude Code | 2026-05-14 | N/A |
| The Claude Desktop app gives you Claude Code with a graphical interface built for running multiple sessions side by side. From 1.2581.0 to before 1.4304.0, Claude Desktop's SSH remote development feature verified only whether a hostname existed in ~/.ssh/known_hosts without comparing the server's presented host key against the stored key. This allowed a network-positioned attacker to present an arbitrary SSH host key and have the connection silently accepted, enabling a man-in-the-middle attack on remote development sessions. Successful exploitation required the attacker to be in a network position to intercept SSH traffic (e.g., via ARP spoofing, rogue Wi-Fi, or DNS poisoning) and the target hostname to already have an entry in the victim's known_hosts file. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.4304.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-44582 | 1 Vercel | 1 Next.js | 2026-05-14 | 3.7 Low |
| Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. From 13.4.6 to before 15.5.16 and 16.2.5, React Server Component responses can be vulnerable to cache poisoning in deployments that rely on shared caches with insufficient response partitioning. In affected conditions, collisions in the _rsc cache-busting value can allow an attacker to poison cache entries so users receive the wrong response variant for a given URL. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.5.16 and 16.2.5. | ||||
| CVE-2026-44351 | 1 Nearform | 1 Fast-jwt | 2026-05-14 | 9.1 Critical |
| fast-jwt provides fast JSON Web Token (JWT) implementation. Prior to 6.2.4, a critical authentication-bypass vulnerability in fast-jwt's async key-resolver flow allows any unauthenticated attacker to forge arbitrary JWTs that are accepted as authentic. When the application's key resolver returns an empty string (''), for example via the common keys[decoded.header.kid] || '' JWKS-style fallback, fast-jwt converts it to a zero-length Buffer, hands it to crypto.createSecretKey, derives allowedAlgorithms = ['HS256','HS384','HS512'] from it, and then verifies the token's signature against an empty-key HMAC. The attacker simply computes HMAC-SHA256(key='', input='${header}.${payload}'), which Node accepts without complaint — and the verifier returns the attacker-chosen payload (sub, admin, scopes, etc.) as authentic. This vulnerability is fixed in 6.2.4. | ||||
| CVE-2020-37168 | 1 Paiement | 1 Ecommerce Systempay | 2026-05-14 | 9.8 Critical |
| Ecommerce Systempay 1.0 contains a weak cryptographic implementation vulnerability that allows attackers to brute force the 16-character production secret key used for payment signature generation. Attackers can extract payment form data and signatures from POST requests to the payment endpoint, then use SHA1 hash comparison to iteratively test key candidates until discovering the correct production key, enabling them to forge valid payment signatures and manipulate transaction amounts. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5926 | 1 Ibm | 4 Security Verify Access, Security Verify Access Container, Verify Identity Access and 1 more | 2026-05-13 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Verify Identity Access Container 11.0 through 11.0.2 and IBM Security Verify Access Container 10.0 through 10.0.9.1 and IBM Verify Identity Access 11.0 through 11.0.2 and IBM Security Verify Access 10.0 through 10.0.9.1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2025-40946 | 1 Siemens | 30 Blueplanet 100 Nx3 M8, Blueplanet 100 Tl3 Gen2, Blueplanet 105 Tl3 and 27 more | 2026-05-13 | 8.3 High |
| A vulnerability has been identified in blueplanet 100 NX3 M8 (All versions), blueplanet 100 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 105 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 105 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 110 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 125 NX3 M11 (All versions), blueplanet 125 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 125 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 137 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 150 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 150 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 155 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 155 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 165 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 165 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 25.0 NX3-33.0 NX3 (All versions), blueplanet 3.0 NX3-20.0 NX3 (All versions), blueplanet 3.0 TL3-60.0 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 3.0-5.0 NX1 (All versions), blueplanet 360 NX3 M6 (All versions), blueplanet 50.0 NX3-60.0 NX3 (All versions), blueplanet 87.0 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 87.0 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet 92.0 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet 92.0 TL3 GEN2 (All versions < V6.1.4.9), blueplanet gridsafe 110 TL3-S (All versions < V3.91), blueplanet gridsafe 137 TL3-S (All versions < V3.91), blueplanet gridsafe 92.0 TL3-S (All versions < V3.91), blueplanet hybrid 10.0 TL3 (All versions), blueplanet hybrid 6.0 NH3-12.0 NH3 (All versions). A CRC16-based algorithm for generating Technical Service credentials could allow an attacker to derive the credentials from the devices serial number and misuse them to gain unauthorized access. | ||||
| CVE-2019-25651 | 1 Ubiquiti | 4 Unifi Uap-ac Firmware, Unifi Uap Firmware, Unifi Usg Firmware and 1 more | 2026-05-12 | 8.3 High |
| Ubiquiti UniFi Network Controller prior to 5.10.12 (excluding 5.6.42), UAP FW prior to 4.0.6, UAP-AC, UAP-AC v2, and UAP-AC Outdoor FW prior to 3.8.17, USW FW prior to 4.0.6, USG FW prior to 4.4.34 uses AES-CBC encryption for device-to-controller communication, which contains cryptographic weaknesses that allow attackers to recover encryption keys from captured traffic. Attackers with adjacent network access can capture sufficient encrypted traffic and exploit AES-CBC mode vulnerabilities to derive the encryption keys, enabling unauthorized control and management of network devices. | ||||
| CVE-2015-10148 | 1 Belden | 1 Hirschmann Hilcos | 2026-05-12 | 8.2 High |
| Hirschmann HiLCOS devices OpenBAT, WLC, BAT300, BAT54 prior to 8.80 and OpenBAT prior to 9.10 are shipped with identical default SSH and SSL keys that cannot be changed, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to decrypt or intercept encrypted management communications. Attackers can perform man-in-the-middle attacks, impersonate devices, and expose sensitive information by leveraging the shared default cryptographic keys across multiple devices. | ||||
| CVE-2025-55449 | 1 Astrbot | 1 Astrbot | 2026-05-12 | 7.3 High |
| AstrBotDevs AstrBot 3.5.15 has Advanced_System_for_Text_Response_and_Bot_Operations_Tool as the hardcoded private key used to sign a JWT. | ||||
| CVE-2026-21925 | 2 Oracle, Redhat | 6 Graalvm, Graalvm For Jdk, Java Se and 3 more | 2026-05-12 | 4.8 Medium |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition product of Oracle Java SE (component: RMI). Supported versions that are affected are Oracle Java SE: 8u471, 8u471-b50, 8u471-perf, 11.0.29, 17.0.17, 21.0.9, 25.0.1; Oracle GraalVM for JDK: 17.0.17 and 21.0.9; Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition: 21.3.16. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition accessible data. Note: This vulnerability can be exploited by using APIs in the specified Component, e.g., through a web service which supplies data to the APIs. This vulnerability also applies to Java deployments, typically in clients running sandboxed Java Web Start applications or sandboxed Java applets, that load and run untrusted code (e.g., code that comes from the internet) and rely on the Java sandbox for security. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 4.8 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N). | ||||
| CVE-2025-69418 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-05-12 | 4 Medium |
| Issue summary: When using the low-level OCB API directly with AES-NI or<br>other hardware-accelerated code paths, inputs whose length is not a multiple<br>of 16 bytes can leave the final partial block unencrypted and unauthenticated.<br><br>Impact summary: The trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in<br>cleartext on encryption and are not covered by the authentication tag,<br>allowing an attacker to read or tamper with those bytes without detection.<br><br>The low-level OCB encrypt and decrypt routines in the hardware-accelerated<br>stream path process full 16-byte blocks but do not advance the input/output<br>pointers. The subsequent tail-handling code then operates on the original<br>base pointers, effectively reprocessing the beginning of the buffer while<br>leaving the actual trailing bytes unprocessed. The authentication checksum<br>also excludes the true tail bytes.<br><br>However, typical OpenSSL consumers using EVP are not affected because the<br>higher-level EVP and provider OCB implementations split inputs so that full<br>blocks and trailing partial blocks are processed in separate calls, avoiding<br>the problematic code path. Additionally, TLS does not use OCB ciphersuites.<br>The vulnerability only affects applications that call the low-level<br>CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions directly with<br>non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds.<br>For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity.<br><br>The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected<br>by this issue, as OCB mode is not a FIPS-approved algorithm.<br><br>OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.0 and 1.1.1 are vulnerable to this issue.<br><br>OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not affected by this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2025-3576 | 1 Redhat | 8 Discovery, Enterprise Linux, Openshift and 5 more | 2026-05-12 | 5.9 Medium |
| A vulnerability in the MIT Kerberos implementation allows GSSAPI-protected messages using RC4-HMAC-MD5 to be spoofed due to weaknesses in the MD5 checksum design. If RC4 is preferred over stronger encryption types, an attacker could exploit MD5 collisions to forge message integrity codes. This may lead to unauthorized message tampering. | ||||
| CVE-2026-8072 | 1 Ingeteam | 1 Ingecon Sun Ems Board | 2026-05-12 | N/A |
| Insecure generation of credentials in the local SAT (Technical Support) access functionality of the Ingecon Sun EMS Board. The vulnerability arose because the secret access credentials were not based on a secure cryptographic scheme, but rather on a weak hashing algorithm, which could allow an attacker to carry out a privilege escalation. | ||||
| CVE-2023-6129 | 2 Openssl, Redhat | 2 Openssl, Enterprise Linux | 2026-05-12 | 6.5 Medium |
| Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications running on PowerPC CPU based platforms if the CPU provides vector instructions. Impact summary: If an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various application dependent consequences. The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL for PowerPC CPUs restores the contents of vector registers in a different order than they are saved. Thus the contents of some of these vector registers are corrupted when returning to the caller. The vulnerable code is used only on newer PowerPC processors supporting the PowerISA 2.07 instructions. The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application process. However unless the compiler uses the vector registers for storing pointers, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of service. The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol versions 1.2 and 1.3. If this cipher is enabled on the server a malicious client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used. This implies that TLS server applications using OpenSSL can be potentially impacted. However we are currently not aware of any concrete application that would be affected by this issue therefore we consider this a Low severity security issue. | ||||
| CVE-2023-5678 | 2 Openssl, Redhat | 5 Openssl, Enterprise Linux, Jboss Core Services and 2 more | 2026-05-12 | 5.3 Medium |
| Issue summary: Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() doesn't make any of these checks, and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn't check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the "-pubcheck" option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2023-5363 | 4 Debian, Netapp, Openssl and 1 more | 16 Debian Linux, H300s, H300s Firmware and 13 more | 2026-05-12 | 7.5 High |
| Issue summary: A bug has been identified in the processing of key and initialisation vector (IV) lengths. This can lead to potential truncation or overruns during the initialisation of some symmetric ciphers. Impact summary: A truncation in the IV can result in non-uniqueness, which could result in loss of confidentiality for some cipher modes. When calling EVP_EncryptInit_ex2(), EVP_DecryptInit_ex2() or EVP_CipherInit_ex2() the provided OSSL_PARAM array is processed after the key and IV have been established. Any alterations to the key length, via the "keylen" parameter or the IV length, via the "ivlen" parameter, within the OSSL_PARAM array will not take effect as intended, potentially causing truncation or overreading of these values. The following ciphers and cipher modes are impacted: RC2, RC4, RC5, CCM, GCM and OCB. For the CCM, GCM and OCB cipher modes, truncation of the IV can result in loss of confidentiality. For example, when following NIST's SP 800-38D section 8.2.1 guidance for constructing a deterministic IV for AES in GCM mode, truncation of the counter portion could lead to IV reuse. Both truncations and overruns of the key and overruns of the IV will produce incorrect results and could, in some cases, trigger a memory exception. However, these issues are not currently assessed as security critical. Changing the key and/or IV lengths is not considered to be a common operation and the vulnerable API was recently introduced. Furthermore it is likely that application developers will have spotted this problem during testing since decryption would fail unless both peers in the communication were similarly vulnerable. For these reasons we expect the probability of an application being vulnerable to this to be quite low. However if an application is vulnerable then this issue is considered very serious. For these reasons we have assessed this issue as Moderate severity overall. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this because the issue lies outside of the FIPS provider boundary. OpenSSL 3.1 and 3.0 are vulnerable to this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2023-50781 | 2 M2crypto Project, Redhat | 5 M2crypto, Enterprise Linux, Rhev Hypervisor and 2 more | 2026-05-12 | 7.5 High |
| A flaw was found in m2crypto. This issue may allow a remote attacker to decrypt captured messages in TLS servers that use RSA key exchanges, which may lead to exposure of confidential or sensitive data. | ||||
| CVE-2026-33361 | 1 Meari | 1 Com.meari.sdk | 2026-05-12 | 7.5 High |
| In Meari IoT SDK image handling (libmrplayer.so) as observed in CloudEdge 5.5.0 (build 220), Arenti 1.8.1 (build 220), and related white-label apps (<= 1.8.x), baby monitor ".jpgx3" files use reversible XOR over only the first 1024 bytes with a predictable key derivation model. | ||||