Export limit exceeded: 419054 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (419054 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-112556 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2026-10-30 | 4.8 Medium |
| A race condition was addressed with additional validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Golden Gate 27.2, macOS Sequoia 15.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.7.2. An attacker may tamper with code-signed applications to execute arbitrary code in the application's context. | ||||
| CVE-2026-113947 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| This issue was addressed with improved access restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Golden Gate 27.2. Unpacking a maliciously crafted archive may lead to unexpected app termination or arbitrary code execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-83719 | 1 Microsoft | 20 Windows 10 1809, Windows 10 21h2, Windows 10 21h2 and 17 more | 2026-10-30 | 5.5 Medium |
| Buffer over-read in Servicing Stack Updates allows an authorized attacker to disclose information locally. | ||||
| CVE-2026-106634 | 1 Adobe | 2 Adobe Experience Manager, Experience Manager | 2026-10-30 | 7.7 High |
| Adobe Experience Manager is affected by an Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability that could result in arbitrary file system write. A low-privileged attacker could leverage this vulnerability to write files to unauthorized locations on the file system. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107305 | 1 Adobe | 2 Adobe Experience Manager, Experience Manager | 2026-10-30 | 5.4 Medium |
| Adobe Experience Manager is affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low-privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim's browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field. Scope is changed. | ||||
| CVE-2026-103092 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.5 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands due to improper access control. | ||||
| CVE-2026-83699 | 1 Microsoft | 28 Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809, Windows 10 21h2 and 25 more | 2026-10-30 | 7.8 High |
| Stack-based buffer overflow in Windows Client-Side Caching (CSC) Service allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges locally. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104309 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104314 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow an authenticated attacker with a read or share grant on a target flow to retrieve the flow owner's stored third-party credentials in cleartext from the API response. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104316 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to cancel any victim's running background workflow job by sending a single HTTP request, resulting in loss of in-progress compute work with no flow-level permission check. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104328 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104339 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 9.8 Critical |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107328 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 9.9 Critical |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of code in eval/exec. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110190 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow an authenticated user to traverse directories on the system. An attacker could send a specially crafted URL request to view arbitrary files on the system. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110193 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote attacker with a low-privileged authenticated account to cause the Agentic Assistant to generate or submit component code using these unblocked patterns, resulting in arbitrary operating system command execution on the server. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110244 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107682 | 1 Adobe | 2 Adobe Experience Manager, Experience Manager | 2026-10-30 | 5.4 Medium |
| Adobe Experience Manager is affected by a DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. An attacker could exploit this issue by manipulating the DOM environment to execute malicious JavaScript within the context of the victim's browser. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must visit a crafted webpage. Scope is changed. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110309 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper control of code generation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18894 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote attacker to trigger pre-existing stored Python component code in a public workflow, executing it under the flow owner's runtime context within the server process. This bypasses the intended trust boundary where public execution paths are restricted to server-trusted component code. | ||||
| CVE-2026-99201 | 1 Linux | 2 Linux, Linux Kernel | 2026-10-30 | 3.3 Low |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netlink: avoid hashing the network namespace pointer The netlink rhashtable key includes a raw struct net pointer and a user-controlled port ID. Both /proc/net/netlink and socket diagnostics expose the table's bucket order. By binding and rebinding chosen NETLINK_USERSOCK port IDs, an unprivileged reader can distinguish equal buckets and recover the low bits of the Jenkins hash. Its 32-bit seed and the limited set of kernel-image slides can then be searched offline to recover the address of init_net. Use the namespace's unique, non-address net_cookie in the comparison key instead. It is assigned before the per-net initializers run and remains unchanged for the namespace's lifetime. The lookup key and object hash are still built by netlink_compare_arg_init(), keeping lookup, insertion, removal and rehashing consistent while preserving namespace separation. Neither public table walker needs to change. Reading the socket's namespace cookie in netlink_compare() is safe under RCU, including during namespace teardown. netlink_release() removes the socket from the hash table and defers its final put with call_rcu(). cleanup_net() runs the per-net exit methods and waits for outstanding RCU callbacks with rcu_barrier() before freeing namespace storage. Unlike ns.ns_id, net_cookie is also available and initialized during setup_net() in older stable kernels, making the change straightforward to backport to v5.15 and later. | ||||