Export limit exceeded: 407679 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (407679 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-107381 | 2026-10-14 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| svg-sanitizer is a PHP SVG/XML sanitizer. Prior to 1.0.0, Resolver::processReferences() in src/ElementReference/Resolver.php builds the SVG <use> reference graph with a case-sensitive href attribute predicate before cleanHrefAttributes() normalizes mixed-case names. An attacker can provide xlink:HrEf on nested <use> elements so the graph omits those references, after which the sanitizer converts the attribute to canonical xlink:href and returns the live nesting structure without applying the useNestingLimit protection. A consuming application that renders the sanitized SVG can therefore be exposed to the resource exhaustion that control is designed to prevent. This issue is fixed in version 1.0.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104939 | 2026-10-14 | 7.5 High | ||
| Description NGINX Ingress Controller has a vulnerability when implementing an externalAuth policy for ingress. NGINX Ingress Controller may mishandle the HTTP response from an OAuth IdP and allow an attacker to acquire unauthenticated access to protected paths before the proper external authentication can happen. Impact This vulnerability may allow remote attackers unauthenticated access to protected paths. There is no control plane exposure; this is a data plane issue only. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated. | ||||
| CVE-2026-101019 | 2026-10-14 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| Description NGINX JavaScript (njs) has a vulnerability where the njs XML module exposes entity-backed XML attributes inconsistently with libxml2 canonicalization. In both the built-in njs and QuickJS backends during the canonicalization process, the $attr$Name getter may return undefined for an explicitly present attribute containing an internal entity reference. The $attrs getter may return a value derived only from the first attribute child. This may allow an unauthenticated attacker that invests significant effort in obtaining a genuinely signed document to skip validation while signature verification succeeds. An nginx-saml deployment is a confirmed affected consumer when run with the built-in njs backend. Impact In affected signed-XML consumers, an unauthenticated attacker can cause security-relevant attributes to appear absent or truncated while signature verification succeeds. In nginx-saml, this can bypass expiry, Destination, and request-correlation checks, enabling replay or acceptance of a response outside its intended context. It does not permit signature or identity forgery, or a direct availability impact. There is no control plane exposure; this is a data plane issue only. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated. | ||||
| CVE-2026-101025 | 2026-10-14 | 5.3 Medium | ||
| Description NGINX JavaScript (njs) has a vulnerability where the built-in njs engine leaks a libxml2 parser context when xml.parse() fails. The failure path did not register cleanup and the context was not released for the lifetime of the process. An unauthenticated attacker may send requests with malformed XML and can cause unbounded memory growth in long-lived NGINX worker processes. Impact This vulnerability may allow remote attackers to send requests that trigger repeated parsing of malformed XML and may lead to NGINX worker termination or denial of service. There is no control plane exposure; this is a data plane issue only. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73273 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's Maven upload handler reads checksum uploads entirely into memory and returns before enforcing package-size quotas. An authenticated user with package-publish permission can submit an oversized body to a checksum endpoint despite legitimate checksum values being at most 128 bytes. This bypasses the upload quota on that path and can exhaust server memory. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73135 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea uses inconsistent repository visibility predicates, and the condition used by some repository-listing endpoints admits repositories whose owners are hidden from the viewer. Those listings disclose repository metadata even though direct routes correctly deny access with a 404 response. The issue exposes repository existence and listing information across the intended owner-visibility boundary. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73130 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea does not limit the length of the gitignores field accepted by repository-creation forms and the API. Repository initialization splits the field into template names, repeatedly reads the referenced templates, and buffers their contents in memory. An attacker who can create repositories can submit an oversized value to amplify template reads and memory use, impairing availability. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73126 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's Actions workflow status badge endpoint does not enforce repository-read scope or the public-only restriction on the token authenticating the request. A token lacking read:repository, or restricted to public repositories, can retrieve the latest workflow status of a private repository accessible to its owner. This discloses private workflow status beyond the token's intended delegated permissions. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71301 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| 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-2026-71184 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's pull request review notifier does not attach the pull request to the Actions notification, so the fork workflow approval gate does not recognize the run as originating from a fork. Review comment and review approval or rejection events can consequently load workflow code from the fork head and run it on the base repository's runners without the required maintainer approval. This allows execution of fork-controlled workflow code across the intended approval boundary. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70407 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's organization-list API does not enforce the read:organization token scope. A token limited to another category, such as read:misc, can retrieve organization metadata visible to its owner. For a site administrator's token, the response can include Limited and private organizations, bypassing the intended restriction on the token's delegated access. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70406 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's shared comparison helper omits the token repository-access check used when updating pull requests. A public-only token with read:repository scope can route a comparison or pull request creation through a public base repository and retrieve commit history and diffs from a private head repository accessible to the token owner. This bypasses the token's public-only restriction; it does not remove the account's underlying repository permission checks. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70402 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea creates server-side Git hook directories and scripts with mode 0777 and relies on the process umask to restrict access. With a permissive umask such as 0000 or 0002, another local user who can reach the repository storage may modify a hook or add an executable to a writable hook directory. A later Git operation can execute that file as the Gitea service account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70400 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's repository migration API accepts a public-only token when the request specifies creation of a private repository. A delegated token intended to operate only on public resources can create a private repository and migration task under the authorizing account or an organization where that user has the necessary permissions. The ordinary private repository-creation route rejects the same token, but the migration path omits that restriction. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70396 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| Gitea's organization repository-creation API requires write:organization but omits the write:repository token scope enforced by other repository-creation routes. A personal access token or OAuth application token without repository-write scope can therefore create organization-owned repositories if the authorizing user has permission to do so. This bypasses the token's delegated scope boundary while remaining subject to the user's organization permissions. | ||||
| CVE-2026-68964 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | ||
| 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 | N/A | ||
| 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 | N/A | ||
| 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 | N/A | ||
| 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 | N/A | ||
| 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. | ||||