Total
965 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-46774 | 1 Fortinet | 1 Forticlient | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| An Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature vulnerability [CWE-347] in FortiClient MacOS installer version 7.4.2 and below, version 7.2.9 and below, 7.0 all versions may allow a local user to escalate their privileges via FortiClient related executables. | |||||
| CVE-2025-59288 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Playwright | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Github: Playwright allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over an adjacent network. | |||||
| CVE-2025-55039 | 1 Apache | 1 Spark | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| This issue affects Apache Spark versions before 3.4.4, 3.5.2 and 4.0.0. Apache Spark versions before 4.0.0, 3.5.2 and 3.4.4 use an insecure default network encryption cipher for RPC communication between nodes. When spark.network.crypto.enabled is set to true (it is set to false by default), but spark.network.crypto.cipher is not explicitly configured, Spark defaults to AES in CTR mode (AES/CTR/NoPadding), which provides encryption without authentication. This vulnerability allows a man-in-the-middle attacker to modify encrypted RPC traffic undetected by flipping bits in ciphertext, potentially compromising heartbeat messages or application data and affecting the integrity of Spark workflows. To mitigate this issue, users should either configure spark.network.crypto.cipher to AES/GCM/NoPadding to enable authenticated encryption or enable SSL encryption by setting spark.ssl.enabled to true, which provides stronger transport security. | |||||
| CVE-2025-58356 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Constellation is the first Confidential Kubernetes. The Constellation CVM image uses LUKS2-encrypted volumes for persistent storage. When opening an encrypted storage device, the CVM uses the libcryptsetup function crypt_activate_by_passhrase. If the VM is successful in opening the partition with the disk encryption key, it treats the volume as confidential. However, due to the unsafe handling of null keyslot algorithms in the cryptsetup 2.8.1, it is possible that the opened volume is not encrypted at all. Cryptsetup prior to version 2.8.1 does not report an error when processing LUKS2-formatted disks that use the cipher_null-ecb algorithm in the keyslot encryption field. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.24.0. | |||||
| CVE-2025-12295 | 1 Dlink | 2 Dap-2695, Dap-2695 Firmware | 2026-10-08 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 6.6 MEDIUM |
| A weakness has been identified in D-Link DAP-2695 2.00RC13. The affected element is the function sub_40C6B8 of the component Firmware Update Handler. Executing manipulation can lead to improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack can be launched remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer. | |||||
| CVE-2025-34500 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units. | |||||
| CVE-2025-34503 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model. | |||||
| CVE-2025-54549 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 5.9 MEDIUM | ||
| Cryptographic validation of upgrade images could be circumventing by dropping a specifically crafted file into the upgrade ISO | |||||
| CVE-2026-79807 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH | ||
| A missing integrity verification vulnerability in the Windows client software for ClearPass Policy Manager could allow malicious users on a local instance to elevate their user privileges. A successful exploit could allow these users to execute attacker-supplied code with elevated privileges on the local system. | |||||
| CVE-2026-102266 | 1 Pyjwt Project | 1 Pyjwt | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 7.4 HIGH |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.13.0 until 2.14.0, HMACAlgorithm.from_jwk is affected because PyJWK verification path used the decoded key without applying prepare_key validation. This occurs when a trusted JWK Set contains an oct entry with an empty k value. As a result, an attacker signs an HMAC token with the same zero-length key accepted by PyJWT. Consequently, forged token can carry arbitrary authenticated claims. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-102268 | 1 Pyjwt Project | 1 Pyjwt | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. Prior to 2.14.0, is_pem_format in jwt/utils.py is affected because is_pem_format does not recognize every PEM representation accepted by the cryptography loader. This occurs when an application mixes HMAC and asymmetric algorithms and supplies a mutated public-key PEM as raw key bytes. As a result, HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key treats the unrecognized asymmetric public key as an HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-48558 | 1 Simple-help | 1 Simplehelp | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 10.0 CRITICAL |
| SimpleHelp versions 5.5.15 and prior and 6.0 pre-release versions contain an authentication bypass vulnerability in the OIDC authentication flow. When OIDC authentication is configured, identity tokens submitted during login are accepted without verifying their cryptographic signature. In a vulnerable configuration, a remote, unauthenticated attacker can submit a forged token containing arbitrary identity claims to obtain a fully authenticated technician session. In some configurations, this may also allow bypass of multi-factor authentication. No user interaction is required. | |||||
| CVE-2025-43521 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| A downgrade issue affecting Intel-based Mac computers was addressed with additional code-signing restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.3, macOS Tahoe 26.2. An app may be able to access sensitive user data. | |||||
| CVE-2025-43522 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 3.3 LOW |
| A downgrade issue affecting Intel-based Mac computers was addressed with additional code-signing restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.3, macOS Tahoe 26.2. An app may be able to access user-sensitive data. | |||||
| CVE-2025-13662 | 1 Ivanti | 1 Endpoint Manager | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signatures in the patch management component of Ivanti Endpoint Manager prior to version 2024 SU4 SR1 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code. User Interaction is required. | |||||
| CVE-2025-68113 | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| ALTCHA is privacy-first software for captcha and bot protection. A cryptographic semantic binding flaw in ALTCHA libraries allows challenge payload splicing, which may enable replay attacks. The HMAC signature does not unambiguously bind challenge parameters to the nonce, allowing an attacker to reinterpret a valid proof-of-work submission with a modified expiration value. This may allow previously solved challenges to be reused beyond their intended lifetime, depending on server-side replay handling and deployment assumptions. The vulnerability primarily impacts abuse-prevention mechanisms such as rate limiting and bot mitigation. It does not directly affect data confidentiality or integrity. This issue has been addressed by enforcing explicit semantic separation between challenge parameters and the nonce during HMAC computation. Users are advised to upgrade to patched versions, which include version 1.0.0 of the altcha Golang package, version 1.0.0 of the altcha Rubygem, version 1.0.0 of the altcha pip package, version 1.0.0 of the altcha Erlang package, version 1.4.1 of the altcha-lib npm package, version 1.3.1 of the altcha-org/altcha Composer package, and version 1.3.0 of the org.altcha:altcha Maven package. As a mitigation, implementations may append a delimiter to the end of the `salt` value prior to HMAC computation (for example, `<salt>?expires=<time>&`). This prevents ambiguity between parameters and the nonce and is backward-compatible with existing implementations, as the delimiter is treated as a standard URL parameter separator. | |||||
| CVE-2013-3900 | 1 Microsoft | 22 Windows 10 1507, Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809 and 19 more | 2026-10-07 | 7.6 HIGH | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| Why is Microsoft republishing a CVE from 2013? We are republishing CVE-2013-3900 in the Security Update Guide to update the Security Updates table and to inform customers that the EnableCertPaddingCheck is available in all currently supported versions of Windows 10 and Windows 11. While the format is different from the original CVE published in 2013, except for clarifications about how to configure the EnableCertPaddingCheck registry value, the information herein remains unchanged from the original text published on December 10, 2013, Microsoft does not plan to enforce the stricter verification behavior as a default functionality on supported releases of Microsoft Windows. This behavior remains available as an opt-in feature via reg key setting, and is available on supported editions of Windows released since December 10, 2013. This includes all currently supported versions of Windows 10 and Windows 11. The supporting code for this reg key was incorporated at the time of release for Windows 10 and Windows 11, so no security update is required; however, the reg key must be set. See the Security Updates table for the list of affected software. Vulnerability Description A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the WinVerifyTrust function handles Windows Authenticode signature verification for portable executable (PE) files. An anonymous attacker could exploit the vulnerability by modifying an existing signed executable file to leverage unverified portions of the file in such a way as to add malicious code to the file without invalidating the signature. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. If a user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights. Exploitation of this vulnerability requires that a user or application run or install a specially crafted, signed PE file. An attacker could modify an... See more at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2013-3900 | |||||
| CVE-2025-15444 | 1 Iamb | 1 Crypt\ | 2026-10-07 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Crypt::Sodium::XS module versions prior to 0.000042, for Perl, include a vulnerable version of libsodium libsodium <= 1.0.20 or a version of libsodium released before December 30, 2025 contains a vulnerability documented as CVE-2025-69277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-69277 . The libsodium vulnerability states: In atypical use cases involving certain custom cryptography or untrusted data to crypto_core_ed25519_is_valid_point, mishandles checks for whether an elliptic curve point is valid because it sometimes allows points that aren't in the main cryptographic group. 0.000042 includes a version of libsodium updated to 1.0.20-stable, released January 3, 2026, which includes a fix for the vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2026-105161 | 2026-10-06 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| A flaw has been found in invariant-systems-ai aiir up to 1.7.0. The affected element is an unknown function of the component Policy Gate Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack can be executed remotely. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The GitHub repository of this project is not available anymore. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer. | |||||
| CVE-2026-34840 | 1 Hackerbay | 1 Oneuptime | 2026-10-06 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| OneUptime is an open-source monitoring and observability platform. Prior to version 10.0.42, OneUptime's SAML SSO implementation (App/FeatureSet/Identity/Utils/SSO.ts) has decoupled signature verification and identity extraction. isSignatureValid() verifies the first <Signature> element in the XML DOM using xml-crypto, while getEmail() always reads from assertion[0] via xml2js. An attacker can prepend an unsigned assertion containing an arbitrary identity before a legitimately signed assertion, resulting in authentication bypass. This issue has been patched in version 10.0.42. | |||||