Total
15377 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-36660 | 1 Nettle Project | 1 Nettle | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| The OCB feature in libnettle in Nettle 3.9 before 3.9.1 allows memory corruption. | |||||
| CVE-2023-35001 | 4 Debian, Fedoraproject, Linux and 1 more | 8 Debian Linux, Fedora, Linux Kernel and 5 more | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| Linux Kernel nftables Out-Of-Bounds Read/Write Vulnerability; nft_byteorder poorly handled vm register contents when CAP_NET_ADMIN is in any user or network namespace | |||||
| CVE-2023-34319 | 3 Debian, Linux, Xen | 3 Debian Linux, Linux Kernel, Xen | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| The fix for XSA-423 added logic to Linux'es netback driver to deal with a frontend splitting a packet in a way such that not all of the headers would come in one piece. Unfortunately the logic introduced there didn't account for the extreme case of the entire packet being split into as many pieces as permitted by the protocol, yet still being smaller than the area that's specially dealt with to keep all (possible) headers together. Such an unusual packet would therefore trigger a buffer overrun in the driver. | |||||
| CVE-2023-32643 | 1 Gnome | 1 Glib | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| A flaw was found in GLib. The GVariant deserialization code is vulnerable to a heap buffer overflow introduced by the fix for CVE-2023-32665. This bug does not affect any released version of GLib, but does affect GLib distributors who followed the guidance of GLib developers to backport the initial fix for CVE-2023-32665. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16170 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to a heap buffer overflow. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16178 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to improper input validation. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16340 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an out-of-bounds write in the RFC2047 encoded-word parser. | |||||
| CVE-2026-14991 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 is vulnerable to a buffer overflow, caused by improper bounds checking. A local user could overflow the buffer and execute arbitrary code on the system. | |||||
| CVE-2026-15762 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an out-of-bounds write. | |||||
| CVE-2026-15784 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an out-of-bounds write. | |||||
| CVE-2026-15819 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to out-of-bounds memory access caused by a strict-weak-ordering violation in a sorting comparator. | |||||
| CVE-2026-15824 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 8.2 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to a heap-based buffer overflow. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16159 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 8.6 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information and cause a denial of service due to an out-of-bounds write. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16163 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 8.6 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause memory corruption due to an out-of-bounds write. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16164 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-15 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to a buffer overflow. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16167 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to improper bounds checking. | |||||
| CVE-2026-85440 | 1 Themoos | 1 Core-moos | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 contains a pre-authentication heap overflow vulnerability in MOOSCommPkt packet handling that allows remote attackers to write arbitrary data by declaring a negative packet length. Attackers can exploit the signed integer check in InflateTo() and negative size conversion in recv() to overflow a four-byte heap buffer during the HandShake phase before authentication. | |||||
| CVE-2026-85437 | 1 Mit | 1 Moos-ivp | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| MOOS-IvP through 24.8.1 contains multiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities in IvP function string decoders that trust attacker-controlled length fields without validation. Attackers can craft malicious encoded strings with mismatched declared and actual field lengths to overflow heap and stack buffers, potentially achieving remote code execution through MOOS variables or alog files. | |||||
| CVE-2023-6931 | 2 Debian, Linux | 2 Debian Linux, Linux Kernel | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| A heap out-of-bounds write vulnerability in the Linux kernel's Performance Events system component can be exploited to achieve local privilege escalation. A perf_event's read_size can overflow, leading to an heap out-of-bounds increment or write in perf_read_group(). We recommend upgrading past commit 382c27f4ed28f803b1f1473ac2d8db0afc795a1b. | |||||
| CVE-2023-6129 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications running on PowerPC CPU based platforms if the CPU provides vector instructions. Impact summary: If an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various application dependent consequences. The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL for PowerPC CPUs restores the contents of vector registers in a different order than they are saved. Thus the contents of some of these vector registers are corrupted when returning to the caller. The vulnerable code is used only on newer PowerPC processors supporting the PowerISA 2.07 instructions. The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application process. However unless the compiler uses the vector registers for storing pointers, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of service. The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol versions 1.2 and 1.3. If this cipher is enabled on the server a malicious client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used. This implies that TLS server applications using OpenSSL can be potentially impacted. However we are currently not aware of any concrete application that would be affected by this issue therefore we consider this a Low severity security issue. | |||||