Export limit exceeded: 425829 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 95370 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (95370 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-71918 | 1 Draytek | 14 Vigorswitch Fx2120 Firmware, Vigorswitch G1282 Firmware, Vigorswitch G2100 Firmware and 11 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorSwitch models contain a command injection vulnerability in the webBackupAction function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering of the option, key, pw_encode, pathN, and valueN fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71913 | 1 Draytek | 12 Vigorap 1060c, Vigorap 1060c Firmware, Vigorap 903 and 9 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorAP models contain a command injection vulnerability in the upload_settings.cgi interface. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient filtering before the restorekey field is concatenated into a shell command. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71908 | 1 Draytek | 12 Vigorap 1060c, Vigorap 1060c Firmware, Vigorap 903 and 9 more | 2026-08-26 | 7.2 High |
| Multiple DrayTek VigorAP models contain a command injection vulnerability in the mesh_start_speed_test function. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient sanitization of the meshdevice_index and meshdevice_ip fields before command execution. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface. | ||||
| CVE-2026-56704 | 2 Adminer, Vrana | 2 Adminer, Adminer | 2026-08-26 | 6.1 Medium |
| Adminer before 5.4.3 inserts unsanitized database server version strings into script tags with valid CSP nonces without proper validation. Attackers controlling a rogue MySQL server can return crafted version strings that break out of the JavaScript context and execute arbitrary code, bypassing Content Security Policy protections. | ||||
| CVE-2026-74800 | 2 B3log, Siyuan | 2 Siyuan, Siyuan | 2026-08-26 | 9 Critical |
| SiYuan before v3.7.4 fails to set Content-Disposition and X-Content-Type-Options headers when serving arbitrary file assets, allowing stored cross-site scripting attacks. Authenticated attackers can upload HTML files as assets and execute scripts with full kernel API access when the workspace owner opens the asset link. | ||||
| CVE-2026-13214 | 1 Zephyrproject | 1 Zephyr | 2026-08-26 | 9.8 Critical |
| The OCPP 1.6 client in subsys/net/lib/ocpp/ocpp_j.c contains a stack buffer overflow in parse_getconfig_msg(). When handling a GetConfiguration request from the central system, the handler copied the attacker-controlled JSON "key" string into the caller's fixed 50-byte stack buffer (skey[CISTR50], declared in subsys/net/lib/ocpp/ocpp.c) using an unbounded strcpy(). The parsed key value points directly into the receive buffer, so its length is bounded only by the message size (CONFIG_OCPP_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE, default 2048). The GetConfiguration message is delivered over the WebSocket connection that the charge point opens to its configured central system. The reader thread ocpp_wsreader() reads the message into ui->recv_buf and dispatches it to parse_getconfig_msg() via the PDU function table. An attacker who controls the central system endpoint, or a man-in-the-middle on an unencrypted connection, can send a GetConfiguration request whose "key" field exceeds 50 bytes and overflow the reader thread's stack with attacker-chosen bytes. The consequence is a remotely triggerable stack smash on the OCPP reader thread: at minimum a denial of service, and plausibly remote code execution depending on build-time hardening such as stack canaries and MPU configuration. The fix replaces the strcpy() with a bounded strncpy(key, payload.key[0], CISTR50 - 1) followed by explicit NUL termination, matching the bounded copies already used by the sibling handlers. | ||||
| CVE-2026-13215 | 1 Zephyrproject | 1 Zephyr | 2026-08-26 | 6.8 Medium |
| The Zephyr ext2 filesystem driver fails to validate the s_log_block_size field of the on-disk superblock when mounting a filesystem. ext2_verify_disk_superblock() in subsys/fs/ext2/ext2_impl.c checks the magic number, revision, inode size and group counts, but never bounds s_log_block_size. On a successful verify, subsys/fs/ext2/ext2_ops.c computes fs->block_size = 1024 << superblock.s_log_block_size from this attacker-controlled uint32_t, so a crafted value either overflows the shift (undefined behaviour) or yields a block size far larger than CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE. That block size is then passed to k_mem_slab_init() by ext2_init_blocks_slab() to carve CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_COUNT blocks out of the fixed static buffer __ext2_block_memory_buffer, whose size is CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_COUNT * CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE. k_mem_slab_init() does not verify that the requested blocks fit the buffer, and the ext2 wrapper discards its return value, so the slab is laid out past the end of the static buffer. The mount immediately reads block-group, bitmap and inode blocks of fs->block_size bytes each into these slab blocks, producing an out-of-bounds write into adjacent static memory on the first block read. The entire path is gated only by data read from the mounted image, making this reachable by any attacker who can present a crafted ext2 image to a device that mounts it (for example a removable SD card or storage medium). Because the ext2 driver runs in kernel mode, supplying image bytes yields a supervisor-mode memory-corruption primitive, with impact ranging from denial of service to potential code execution. The fix rejects s_log_block_size values that overflow the shift (greater than 11) or that produce a block size exceeding CONFIG_EXT2_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE, so the block slab can no longer be initialized larger than its backing buffer. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73042 | 2 B3log, Siyuan | 2 Siyuan, Siyuan | 2026-08-26 | 9 Critical |
| SiYuan before v3.7.4 fails to properly escape database menu metadata in HTML interpolation, allowing stored values to execute script when users open group, view, or field-edit menus. Attackers can inject markup through field descriptions or names that close containing elements and execute arbitrary code via event handlers, reaching Node built-ins due to Electron's insecure configuration. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73043 | 2 B3log, Siyuan | 2 Siyuan, Siyuan | 2026-08-26 | 9 Critical |
| SiYuan versions before v3.7.4 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the Template calculation operator, which renders user-authored Go templates and stores output verbatim without sanitization. Attackers can inject malicious HTML and JavaScript into template calculations that execute in the desktop client renderer with Node integration enabled, allowing arbitrary code execution when the database is opened. | ||||
| CVE-2026-54344 | 1 Tooljet | 1 Tooljet | 2026-08-26 | 4.7 Medium |
| ToolJet is an open-source low-code platform for building internal tools. Prior to 3.20.180, ToolJet's render preview deployment workflow interpolates github.event.comment.body directly into a bash conditional in a run step, allowing any GitHub user who can comment on an open pull request with a deploy command to execute shell commands on the CI runner and exfiltrate deployment secrets. This issue is reported as fixed in version 3.20.180. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58192 | 1 Appium | 2 Appium, Appium\/storage-plugin | 2026-08-26 | 8.6 High |
| Appium is a cross-platform automation framework for all kinds of apps, built on top of the W3C WebDriver protocol. Prior to 1.1.6, the Appium storage plugin exposes POST /storage/delete, whose handler passes the user-supplied name value directly into path.join(storageRoot, name) and fs.rimraf() without path sanitization, allowing an unauthenticated remote client to escape the storage root with ../ sequences and recursively delete arbitrary writable files or directories. This issue is fixed in version 1.1.6. | ||||
| CVE-2026-14921 | 2026-08-26 | 6.1 Medium | ||
| The Ultimate Addons for WPBakery Page Builder WordPress plugin before 3.21.5's shared link-rendering function, Ultimate_VC_Addons::uavc_link_init(), | ||||
| CVE-2026-76367 | 1 Splunk | 2 Soar, Splunk | 2026-08-26 | 4 Medium |
| In Splunk SOAR versions below 8.6.0, a user who holds the "Incident Commander" Splunk SOAR role could store JavaScript in a note and run it in the browser of another user when that user opens the note. The stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is possible because Splunk SOAR can treat existing note content as Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) without sanitizing that content when the note format changes. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "Incident Commander" Splunk SOAR role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see Manage roles and permissions in Splunk SOAR (Cloud) (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-soar/soar-cloud/administer-soar-cloud/manage-your-splunk-soar-cloud-users-and-accounts/manage-roles-and-permissions-in-splunk-soar-cloud) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76339 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 5.4 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles could inject arbitrary Search Processing Language (SPL) commands through the geostats command. The injected SPL runs with the permissions of another authenticated user after that user initiates the attacker-controlled geostats search in Splunk Web. The injected SPL could expose all relevant data available to the second user, including stored credentials, and modify lookup files that the second user has permission to change. The vulnerability is possible because the geostats command does not sufficiently validate input before Splunk Enterprise processes it. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see geostats (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/spl-search-reference/10.0/search-commands/geostats) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76333 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 7.1 High |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could store a Dashboard Studio workflow action with a crafted Uniform Resource Locator (URL). When another authenticated user selects the stored action from Event Actions and selects Continue, attacker-controlled JavaScript runs in the browser of that user. This could expose data or actions available through Splunk Web to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Dashboard Studio does not sufficiently validate workflow-action URLs before processing them. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "power" Splunk role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see Define roles on the Splunk platform with capabilities (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/manage-users-and-security/10.2/manage-splunk-platform-users-and-roles/define-roles-on-the-splunk-platform-with-capabilities) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76326 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 5.7 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles could store a dashboard view that runs JavaScript in the browser of another user who opens it and hovers over a sparkline table cell, allowing for access to all relevant data and system integrity available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because the dashboard table renderer does not sufficiently restrict tooltip options or escape tooltip content before display. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76325 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 7.3 High |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could store a malicious ui-tour knowledge object that matches an auto-tour page name and share the object at the app level. The object can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the browser of another authenticated user who visits a standard Splunk Web page. The JavaScript could expose all relevant data and affect system integrity within the second user permissions. The Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is possible because Splunk Web resolves auto-tour entries from the app namespace and uses untrusted tour content when building the tour image. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76324 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 5.7 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could create a malicious Splunk Web tour and cause arbitrary JavaScript to run in the browser of another user when that user opens a crafted tour link. The JavaScript runs in the browser of the affected user, allowing for access to all relevant data available to that user. The Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is possible because Splunk Web renders tour content and tour navigation links without sufficient output encoding and accepts a tour selector value that can be treated as markup. The vulnerability requires another user to open a crafted tour link. The user who holds the "power" Splunk role should not be able to trigger JavaScript execution in another user's browser without that user interaction. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76318 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 5.7 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user that holds a role with the schedule_search capability could store a malicious script in an alert trigger condition field. When another user opens the crafted link, the script runs in the browser of that user and could access all data available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Web uses the alert threshold value in generated alert trigger condition markup without escaping special characters. Successful exploitation requires another user to open the crafted link. For more information see Configure alert trigger conditions (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/alert-and-respond/alerting-manual/10.4/manage-alert-trigger-conditions-and-throttling/configure-alert-trigger-conditions) and Define roles on the Splunk platform with capabilities (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/manage-users-and-security/10.2/manage-splunk-platform-users-and-roles/define-roles-on-the-splunk-platform-with-capabilities) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-76260 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Enterprise | 2026-08-26 | 6.5 Medium |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user that holds a role with the rest_properties_get capability could read encrypted stored credentials through the Representational State Transfer (REST) API. Successful exploitation can expose relevant data protected by the stored credentials. The incorrect permission assignment is possible because the properties REST endpoint requires the rest_properties_get capability instead of the list_storage_passwords capability to read stored credentials. For more information see Define roles on the Splunk platform with capabilities (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/manage-users-and-security/10.4/manage-splunk-platform-users-and-roles/define-roles-on-the-splunk-platform-with-capabilities) in the Splunk documentation. | ||||