Export limit exceeded: 15351 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (832 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-68745 | 2026-08-21 | N/A | ||
| Certificate validation failures in SAML authentication in Apache CloudStack 4.20.3.0 and 4.22.1.0 on all platforms allow a malicious agent to forge a SAML response to the management server. The agent will have to spoof the ip address of the IdP or get an url of its own choosing registered in the management server, after which it can allow logging on with forged signatures. Users are recommended to upgrade to versions 4.20.3.1 or 4.22.1.1 and above, which fix this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-62834 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Azure Data Factory | 2026-08-20 | 9.3 Critical |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Azure Data Factory allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network. | ||||
| CVE-2026-72861 | 2026-08-20 | 5.8 Medium | ||
| The github-issue-bot templates in appwrite/templates verify the GitHub webhook signature with an inverted condition. verifyWebhook in node/github-issue-bot/src/github.js and in node-typescript/github-issue-bot/src/github.ts returns "typeof signature !== 'string' || (await verify(...))", so when the X-Hub-Signature-256 header is absent the first operand is true, the logical OR short-circuits, and the function reports success without performing any HMAC verification. main.js rejects a request only when verifyWebhook returns false, so an unauthenticated request carrying no signature passes the check. Processing then continues to postComment, which takes the repository and issue objects directly from the request body, letting the caller direct the deployed function to post a comment on a repository and issue of their choosing using the configured GITHUB_TOKEN, with the issue author login from the body interpolated into the comment text. | ||||
| CVE-2026-50010 | 1 Netty | 1 Netty | 2026-08-20 | 7.5 High |
| Netty is a network application framework for development of protocol servers and clients. Prior to versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final, SimpleTrustManagerFactory.engineGetTrustManagers() and related paths wrap any user-supplied plain X509TrustManager in X509TrustManagerWrapper, which extends X509ExtendedTrustManager but implements the 3-arg checkServerTrusted(chain, authType, SSLEngine) by discarding the SSLEngine and calling the 2-arg delegate. Because the object now IS an X509ExtendedTrustManager, neither SunJSSE's internal AbstractTrustManagerWrapper nor Netty's own OpenSslX509TrustManagerWrapper will re-wrap it to add endpoint-identification. Consequently, even though Netty 4.2 sets endpointIdentificationAlgorithm="HTTPS" by default, a client built with `SslContextBuilder.forClient().trustManager(somePlainX509TrustManager)` performs no hostname verification at all. Versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final patch the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-39829 | 1 Golang | 2 Crypto, Ssh | 2026-08-20 | 7.5 High |
| The RSA and DSA public key parsers did not enforce size limits on key parameters. A crafted public key with an excessively large modulus or DSA parameter could cause several minutes of CPU consumption during signature verification. This could be triggered by unauthenticated clients during public key authentication. RSA moduli are now limited to 8192 bits, and DSA parameters are validated per FIPS 186-2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76234 | 1 Celabshq | 1 Libcrux | 2026-08-20 | 7.5 High |
| libcrux-ecdh and libcrux-ed25519 before 0.0.6, and libcrux-psq before 0.0.7, contain cryptographic implementation bugs. libcrux-ecdh did not properly check length and clamping during X25519 secret validation (and had a broken clamping check for imported X25519 secret keys); libcrux-ed25519 performed a duplicated clamping step during key generation; and libcrux-psq panicked instead of propagating an AEADError. These were fixed in the respective patched releases. | ||||
| CVE-2026-72889 | 2026-08-19 | N/A | ||
| Net::OAuth versions before 0.33 for Perl allow the sender to choose the signature algorithm in verify. verify resolves the signature method class from the signature_method parameter of the incoming message. signature_method is required on every request, so the algorithm used to check a signature is chosen by whoever sent it, and nothing lets the verifying party pin the method instead. When a message names HMAC-SHA1 or HMAC-SHA256, the key is derived from consumer_secret and token_secret rather than from the key the provider deployed. A provider deployed on RSA-SHA1 holds only the consumer public key, and RFC 5849 does not use consumer_secret for that method, so the required parameter is filled with a placeholder. A client that names HMAC-SHA1 instead has its signature checked against that placeholder, so a guessable one is enough to forge requests for any consumer key and token. | ||||
| CVE-2026-54330 | 2026-08-19 | 8.2 High | ||
| A flaw was found in Ceph RGW's SigV4 signature verification handler. When processing S3 requests, RGW verifies only the headers explicitly listed in the X-Amz-SignedHeaders field but does not reject requests that carry additional unsigned x-amz-* headers. This diverges from the AWS S3 specification, which requires all x-amz-* headers to be signed. As a result, anyone holding a presigned PUT URL can attach arbitrary unsigned x-amz-* headers that RGW will honor, effectively escalating their privileges beyond what the original URL signer authorized. This can lead to unauthorized access to and modification of S3 objects. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58085 | 1 Freebsd | 1 Freebsd | 2026-08-19 | N/A |
| After dispatching a decrypt operation to OCF and receiving the result, the wg(4) driver failed to check whether the MAC verification step succeeded. The driver thus silently accepted packets with an invalid Poly1305 authentication tag. A remote attacker who can send UDP packets to a WireGuard endpoint, and who can guess the bounds of the receiver's replay window, can inject forged or modified transport data packets into the tunnel. A remote attacker who can intercept WireGuard packets bound for a FreeBSD host can modify the ciphertext and authenticated data without detection by the receiver. | ||||
| CVE-2026-55165 | 1 Netflix | 1 Lemur | 2026-08-18 | 4.8 Medium |
| Lemur manages TLS certificate creation. Prior to 1.9.2, the JWT verifier in lemur/auth/service.py:130-137 used fetch_token_header to read header_data["alg"] from an unverified token and passed that attacker-controlled value to decode_with_multiple_secrets. PyJWT 2.x rejects alg=none with the configured key, so the flaw is a defense-in-depth gap rather than a direct authentication bypass in the shipped configuration. The unpinned algorithm can become exploitable after an asymmetric-signing migration through algorithm confusion, and it weakens algorithm-based anomaly detection because the token chooses the recorded value. A separate disclosure of LEMUR_TOKEN_SECRET would also permit forged HS256 tokens, although that disclosure is an independent prerequisite. The fix introduces the server-controlled LEMUR_TOKEN_ALGORITHMS allowlist and defaults it to HS256. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.2. | ||||
| CVE-2025-9210 | 2026-08-18 | 8.1 High | ||
| Missing signature validation in JSON Web Tokens in Otalio Ship Property Management System versions before 2.22.0 allows authenticated attackers to escalate privileges via tampering with JWTs | ||||
| CVE-2026-47191 | 1 Siemens | 1 Kas | 2026-08-18 | N/A |
| kas is a setup tool for bitbake based projects. Prior to version 5.3, when relying solely on a git commit ID (SHA-1 or SHA-256) to qualify if a checkout of a repository is equivalent to the state validated while adding its commit ID to a kas configuration, users may be tricked to check out a branch of the same name from this repository. This implies that the referenced repository has been taken over by an attacker and modified to carry such a branch. SHA-1 commits may also be replaced by creating hash collisions, so the primary impact of this issue is on SHA-256 commit IDs. Version 5.3 fixes the issue. As a workaround, avoid relying solely on the commit ID for integrity validation of a repository that might become under control of a malicious 3rd party. If available, additional validate cryptographically signed commits or tags. Alternatively, mirror the repository to a save place, validate its integrity, and use this instead of the original one. | ||||
| CVE-2026-19910 | 1 Paxtechnology | 1 Q80 | 2026-08-17 | N/A |
| PAX Technology Q80 Application Installer Signature Verification Bypass Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of PAX Technology Q80. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the application installer. The issue results from the lack of proper verification of a cryptographic signature before installing an application. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to execute code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-30585. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18500 | 1 Fastify | 1 Jwt | 2026-08-17 | 8.1 High |
| @fastify/jwt is a JSON Web Token plugin for Fastify. In versions before 10.2.2, a per-request verification key passed to request.jwtVerify({ key }) is silently overridden by the plugin's globally configured secret, because the option merge applies the global key last. Applications that use different keys for different authorization domains, for example separate user and admin keys, therefore accept a token signed with the global key on a route that explicitly requires another key. This lets an ordinary authenticated user cross a key-based trust boundary without knowing either secret. The issue is fixed in @fastify/jwt 10.2.2, where an explicit per-call key takes precedence over the global secret. Users should upgrade to 10.2.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-74876 | 2026-08-17 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| openssl_encrypt versions before 1.4.0 contain a vulnerability in PublicKeyBundle.from_dict() that creates key bundles from untrusted data without verifying signatures. Attackers can call from_dict() followed by to_identity() without signature verification to encrypt data using attacker-controlled public keys, leaking secrets. | ||||
| CVE-2026-74901 | 2026-08-17 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| openssl_encrypt versions before 1.4.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability in pqc.py where AES-GCM decryption failures trigger fallback to unauthenticated AES-CTR mode. Attackers can modify ciphertext in transit to bypass integrity verification and perform bit-flipping attacks without detection. | ||||
| CVE-2026-47192 | 1 Siemens | 1 Kas | 2026-08-17 | N/A |
| kas is a setup tool for bitbake based projects. Starting in version 4.8 and prior to version 5.3, kas checks out and processes repositories regarding configuration includes prior to validating signatures of those repositories. This may allow to replace on original repository with one under the control of an attacker under very specific conditions. First of all, the attacker must have gained control of a repository that a kas file of the victim is referencing. Furthermore, the following conditions must be fulfilled: the victim's kas configuration must include a configuration file from the attacked repository; the repository state is referenced by tag, and no commit ID is specified (this is triggering a warning, though); the key used for validating the tag or commit signature is stored as file in a repository; no fingerprint for the key is specified; and the `_source_dir` key must not be set by the victim when calling kas (e.g. by avoiding a local `.config.yaml`). Given these conditions, the attacker could modify the included kas configuration in way that the key used to validate the tag signature of the attacker's repository could be replaced by an attacker-chosen key. No other exploit possibilities have been identified so far, but this does not rule out that those may exist. All patches have been released along with kas version 5.3. As a workaround, pin the expected signature key via its fingerprint, also when storing it as file in a repository. | ||||
| CVE-2026-74244 | 1 Redhat | 3 Openshift Update Service, Quay, Quay 3 | 2026-08-17 | 5.9 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators. | ||||
| CVE-2026-56864 | 2 Golang, Gotoolchain | 2 Mod, Cmd/go | 2026-08-14 | 7.5 High |
| A malicious GOSUMDB was capable of serving arbitrary module content not contained within the transparency log. This attack allows for a coordinating GOPROXY and GOSUMDB to serve a client malicious module content that cannot be detected by evaluating the transparency log. In order to determine if you have been affected: rm -r go.sum go.work.sum vendor/ && go mod tidy | ||||
| CVE-2026-56865 | 2 Golang, Gotoolchain | 2 Mod, Cmd/go | 2026-08-14 | 8.4 High |
| A malicious GOPROXY was previously capable of forging up to two sumdb tiles that allow for a requested module to bypass the GOSUMDB check and persist attacker-controlled module content to a local Go module cache. This attack allows for a malicious GOPROXY to serve malicious module content that cannot be detected by evaluating the transparency log. All tiles are now correctly verified against their parents. In order to determine if you have been affected: rm -r go.sum go.work.sum vendor/ && go mod tidy | ||||