| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| When migrating a repository from another Gitea instance, Gitea used the page size reported in the source server's API settings to end its paginated downloads. A source that reported `max_response_items` as `0` made these loops run indefinitely and grow server memory until it was exhausted. Any user who can migrate repositories could point a migration at a server they control and cause a denial of service. |
| The Gitea web route for deleting tags (`POST /{owner}/{repo}/tags/delete`) requires only write access to the Code unit, but shares its handler with release deletion and did not check that the target was a plain tag. A collaborator with Code write access and without Releases write access could permanently delete published releases of that repository, including their attachments. Protected tag rules covering the release tag still blocked the deletion. |
| The Gitea API routes for issue attachments (`/api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/assets/{attachment_id}`) also accepted attachments that belong to comments on the issue. Because the author of an issue may edit and delete the issue's attachments, a user who opened an issue could rename or delete attachments that other users had posted in comments on that issue. The contents of the attachments could not be changed. |
| Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Prior to 3.3.1, 3.4.1, 4.0.3 and 4.1.0, the @backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend package is affected by scaffolder action input authorization bypass. An authenticated user with access to affected Scaffolder templates could bypass configured action restrictions. Depending on integration credentials, this could grant unauthorized access to repositories and related source-control resources. This issue is fixed in versions 3.3.1, 3.4.1, 4.0.3 and 4.1.0. |
| Display Product Catalog Based on Customs Declaration application does not perform sufficient authorization checks within certain functionality, allowing an authenticated low-privileged user to access sensitive information beyond their intended authorization scope. This vulnerability has low impact on confidentiality of the data, with no impact on the integrity and availability of the application. |
| SAP S/4HANA does not perform sufficient instance-level authorization checks for certain modification operations on associated business object data. An attacker with low privileges and local access to the system could bypass authorization checks to modify data belonging to objects they are not authorized for. This results in a high impact on integrity. There is no impact on confidentiality and availability. |
| SAP Commerce Cloud does not sufficiently validate certain user-supplied input before it is incorporated into a database query. An authenticated user could send specially crafted requests to affected functionality to inject arbitrary SQL commands. Successful exploitation could allow the user to read, modify or delete sensitive data from the application's database, resulting in a high impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability of the application. |
| The admin API endpoint used to retrieve CLA signature records does not consistently enforce the required authorization checks when the target organisation is specified using an organisation ID.An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially access CLA signature records containing contributor information belonging to an organisation they are not authorized to administer. |
| SAP Manufacturing Integration and Intelligence does not sufficiently enforce authorization boundaries within certain administrative functionality. An attacker with MII administrator privileges could submit a specially crafted request to provision an account with elevated privileges on the underlying Java application server. Successful exploitation could allow the attacker to gain administrative control over the underlying system, extending the impact beyond the vulnerable application. This results in a high impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability. |
| Dayforce ESS Excelity is vulnerable to Time Based-Blind SQL Injection in password recovery functionality. The unauthenticated attacker can prepare GET request with one of the parameters filled in with an arbitrary SQL query. The parameter is interpreted as part of SQL predicate resulting in Time-Based Blind SQL Injection.
This issue was fixed in version V3. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.98.0 and 16.x before 16.6.0 contains an SQL injection vulnerability in some endpoints caused by missing input validation. Remote authenticated attackers can send specially crafted requests to the affected endpoints to manipulate database queries and extract sensitive information from the database. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.110.0 and 16.x before 16.21.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in which certain endpoints fail to enforce proper authorization checks on record status changes. Authenticated low-privileged users can call these endpoints to modify data beyond their permitted role, bypassing intended role-based access restrictions. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.112.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability that allows authenticated users with a common operational role to modify records beyond their permissions due to missing validation in certain endpoints. Attackers holding this role can call the affected endpoints to change a field on record types outside their role's permissions, tampering with data they should not control. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.113.0 and 16.x before 16.24.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in which certain endpoints fail to enforce proper permission checks. Authenticated users can call these endpoints to read financial data beyond what their assigned role permits. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.119.0 and 16.x before 16.31.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in which certain endpoints fail to verify that the caller may read a document before sending transactional email about it. Authenticated attackers can call these endpoints to trigger transactional email for documents they are not permitted to read. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.102.0 and 16.x before 16.11.0 contains an SQL injection vulnerability in some endpoints due to missing input validation, allowing manipulation of database queries. Authenticated attackers can send specially crafted requests to the affected endpoints to extract sensitive information from the database. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.119.0 and 16.x before 16.31.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in certain endpoints that fail to enforce proper authorization checks on valuation data. Authenticated low-privileged users can query these endpoints to read valuation information beyond what their assigned role permits. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.102.0 and 16.x before 16.8.0 contains an SQL injection vulnerability in some endpoints due to missing input validation, allowing manipulation of database queries. Authenticated attackers with low privileges can send specially crafted requests to the affected endpoints to extract sensitive information from the database. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.121.0 and 16.x before 16.34.0 contains an SQL injection vulnerability in some endpoints due to missing input validation. Authenticated attackers with high privileges can send specially crafted requests to these endpoints to inject SQL and extract sensitive information from the database. |
| Frappe ERPNext before 15.121.3 and 16.x before 16.35.0 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in an endpoint that sends transactional email through the site's configured outgoing account without checking the caller's authorization. Any authenticated user can supply arbitrary recipient lists and message content to send attacker-controlled messages carrying the organisation's sending identity. |
