Total
3969 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-73724 | 1 Arubanetworks | 1 Fabric Composer | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 7.1 HIGH |
| Privilege escalation vulnerabilities exist in the API of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated low privilege operator user to change the state of certain settings of a vulnerable system. | |||||
| CVE-2026-73723 | 1 Arubanetworks | 1 Fabric Composer | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 7.1 HIGH |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the web-based management interface of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated low privilege operator user to complete state-changing actions that should not be allowed by their current level of authorization on the platform. | |||||
| CVE-2026-73708 | 1 Arubanetworks | 1 Fabric Composer | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 8.3 HIGH |
| A business logic vulnerability exists in the API of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated low privilege operator user to obtain elevated privileges and modify settings beyond what is authorized by the user's existing privilege level on a vulnerable system. | |||||
| CVE-2026-73707 | 1 Arubanetworks | 1 Fabric Composer | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 8.5 HIGH |
| Privilege escalation vulnerabilities exist in the API of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated low privilege operator user to complete state-changing actions that should not be allowed by their current level of authorization on the platform, including changes to the configuration of systems managed by the affected product. | |||||
| CVE-2026-73702 | 1 Arubanetworks | 1 Fabric Composer | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the API of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated low privilege operator user to escalate their permissions to those of an administrative user, leading to complete system compromise. | |||||
| CVE-2026-78606 | 1 Elastic | 1 Kibana | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 4.2 MEDIUM |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, and deletion of data via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). Where two authenticated principals originating from different authentication realms share the same username value, one could read, modify, and delete the other's private Elastic AI Assistant Knowledge Base entries. | |||||
| CVE-2026-72641 | 1 Elastic | 1 Kibana | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to unauthorized modification of data via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). An authenticated user holding only Security Solution read access in a Kibana space could enumerate and change the state of Entity Store maintainer tasks, silently disabling Entity Analytics maintenance for that space. | |||||
| CVE-2026-63137 | 1 Elastic | 1 Kibana | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 8.3 HIGH |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to privilege escalation via Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels (CAPEC-180). A user holding workflow edit permissions could cause scheduled workflow executions to run with the privileges of a different, higher-privileged user, allowing access to and modification of data beyond their own authorization scope. | |||||
| CVE-2026-84808 | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 4.3 MEDIUM | ||
| Kimai versions before 2.65.0 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability in the REST API timesheet collection endpoint that fails to enforce activity-team access controls. Users with view_other_timesheet permission can list timesheets using activities restricted to teams they do not belong to, bypassing intended data isolation. | |||||
| CVE-2026-72673 | 1 Elastic | 1 Kibana | 2026-09-02 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to unauthorized deletion of Synthetics private locations via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). Synthetics private locations can be shared with more than one space, and deleting one removes it from every space it is shared with. The safeguard that prevented the deletion of a private location still in use evaluated only the monitors visible in the requesting user's own space, so monitors that depend on the private location in other spaces were not taken into account. As a result, an authenticated Kibana user holding the Synthetics write privilege in a single space could delete a private location that other spaces still depend on, even where the user has no access to those spaces. Deleting the private location removes the shared configuration and stops the monitors in the other spaces from running, which suppresses the availability monitoring those spaces rely on. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82748 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash authorizes an aggregate under one read action while computing it under another, so an aggregate can run with policies that do not match the action it was authorized against. Ash.Actions.Aggregate groups aggregates by their {authorize?, read_action} and authorizes each group under that read action, but when building the data query it selected the action as opts[:action] || read_action || <primary read> (lib/ash/actions/aggregate.ex). When a caller passed an :action option, the aggregate query ran under that action while authorization had been computed for the group's own read_action. If the run action's read policies are more permissive than the authorized one, the aggregate (a count or sum) is computed over records the authorized action's policies would have excluded, disclosing information about data the actor cannot read. The fix runs the aggregate under the same read_action it is authorized against. This issue affects ash: from 3.5.13 before 3.32.2. | |||||
| CVE-2026-81643 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_graphql delivers GraphQL subscription payloads for records a subscriber is not authorized to see. In AshGraphql.Subscription.Batcher, do_send/5 resolves the first notification of a batch and filters it with should_send?/1, which drops results whose errors are coded forbidden or not_found or carry no code, precisely so that unauthorized results are not disclosed. The remaining notifications in the batch are read from the process dictionary, re-run through the pipeline, and appended to the outgoing results without that filter. They reach pubsub.publish_subscription/2, and the not is_nil(record) guard drops only nil records, not error-carrying results. Any two qualifying notifications arriving within the default one-second batch interval suffice, and batching is the default path. The fix applies should_send?/1 to the whole batch. This issue affects ash_graphql: from 1.4.0 before 1.11.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-81318 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller in a schema-based multitenant application to receive aggregate values computed from another tenant's rows. When an aggregate is computed over a distinct query, AshSql.AggregateQuery.add_single_aggs/5 rebuilds the outer query from query.from.source alone, which is only the {table, schema} tuple and does not carry query.prefix or query.from.prefix. For strategy(:context) multitenancy those hold the tenant schema, so the rebuilt outer query reads the repo's default schema while the inner correlated subquery still reads the tenant schema, and the two are joined only on primary key. The aggregate, and any relationship join added off the prefix-less binding, is then computed against the wrong tenant's rows. The neighbouring limit and exists branches instead wrap the query with subquery/1, which preserves the prefix. This issue affects ash_sql: from 0.1.0 before 0.7.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-77454 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to bypass a scoping or authorization filter expressed as exists/2 over a relationship that declares both a limit (or from_many?) and a parent(...)-referencing filter or sort. AshSql.Join.related_query/3 skips the caller-supplied exists predicate for such relationships and delegates it to limit_from_many/5. When the relationship's own filter or sort references parent(...), limit_from_many/5 takes a branch that drops both the limit and the predicate, emitting a bare correlated EXISTS with no predicate. The check then matches any record that has any related row. Most severely, when the expression backs a policy (for example authorize_if expr(exists(memberships, user_id == ^actor(:id)))), the actor-scoping condition disappears and the policy passes for any actor with any related row. This issue affects ash_sql: from 0.4.1 before 0.7.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-75542 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in the OAuth token endpoint in hexpm hexpm allows an API key holding the repositories permission to read another organization's private packages. When an API key is exchanged for a token through the OAuth client_credentials grant, validate_scopes_against_key/2 in lib/hexpm_web/controllers/api/oauth_controller.ex admits a requested scope whenever the key carries the repositories permission and the scope string begins with repository:. The organization name is never resolved against the principal, and expand_repositories_scope/3 only rewrites the literal repositories scope, so an explicit repository:<name> passes through untouched. Both CDN edges authorize repository access from the token claim without querying the database, so the minted token is read access to that organization's private packages until it expires. This issue affects hex.pm: from 2025-10-18 before 2026-08-24. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82747 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash returns records that a runtime read policy denies to any actor. When a resource has an access_type :runtime read policy (a check evaluated per record rather than compiled to a filter), Ash.Policy.Authorizer decides each record in check_result/1 (lib/ash/policy/authorizer/authorizer.ex) by discarding impossible policy scenarios and inspecting what remains. When every scenario for a record was impossible, meaning no policy can authorize it and it must be forbidden, the empty-scenario branch instead kept the record ({[record | data], authorizer, any_forbidden?}) and returned it as authorized. As a result, records the runtime read policy denies are returned to any actor. The fix forbids a record whose scenarios are all impossible. This issue affects ash: from 3.4.44 before 3.32.2. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82724 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_phoenix invokes the SubdomainHook authorization callback with a nil tenant, so tenant-scoped access checks never see the tenant they are meant to enforce. AshPhoenix.LiveView.SubdomainHook.on_mount/4 attached a handle_params hook to assign the tenant and then immediately called handle_subdomain in the same on_mount. The tenant assign is only written when LiveView later runs handle_params, strictly after on_mount returns, so handle_subdomain read an unset assign and ran as apply(m, f, [socket, nil | a]). A consumer gate that halts when the user does not belong to the tenant instead evaluated nil, either crashing or taking a permissive branch, and it was never re-run once the real subdomain was assigned or on later navigations. The fix runs handle_subdomain inside the handle_params hook with the real tenant on every navigation. This issue affects ash_phoenix: from 2.1.26 before 2.3.25. | |||||
| CVE-2026-81316 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to receive an aggregate value computed over rows a more restrictive filter should have excluded, disclosing counts, sums, or lists across an authorization or tenancy boundary. AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?/2 reports two aggregate queries as different only when their filter and their sort both differ. Aggregate queries rarely carry a sort, so two aggregates that share a name but carry entirely different filters compare as identical. The colliding aggregate keeps its name and is treated as already computed, and select_aggregates returns the first-registered variant's value. The same name reaches the builder twice with different filters when actor or tenant context is stamped into each aggregate's query, so a narrowly filtered aggregate can be served the value of a previously registered broad one. This issue affects ash_sql: from 0.1.0 before 0.7.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82730 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_typescript allows an unauthorized RPC caller to read attribute values that Ash field policies denied. When a field policy denies an attribute, Ash substitutes %Ash.ForbiddenField{}, which retains the real value in original_value because embedded resources must remain writable, and hides it from Inspect rather than removing it. AshTypescript.Rpc.ResultProcessor strips these markers to nil on its template-driven paths, but normalize_primitive/1 in lib/ash_typescript/rpc/result_processor.ex had no such clause, so a marker fell through to the generic struct branch which calls Map.from_struct/1 and serializes every key, original_value included. The denied value is returned to the caller inside the marker that represents its own denial. The simplest trigger is an action returning an embedded resource as a map, which routes through normalize_resource_struct/2 with an empty template. normalize_value_for_json/1 is a public, unguarded entry point to the same path. This issue affects ash_typescript: from 0.11.0 before 0.18.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82749 | 2026-09-01 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash widens a relationship's parent(...) scoping filter to match unintended records when the referenced parent field cannot be resolved. Loading a relationship whose filter references parent(...) resolves that expression against the parent record. resolve_parent_in_filter/3 (lib/ash/actions/read/relationships.ex) resolved an unresolvable parent reference (for example when the referenced field was not selected on the source query) to nil rather than failing. A scoping predicate such as org_id == parent(org_id) then becomes an IS NULL match, and a guard like is_nil(parent(org_id)) or org_id == parent(org_id) activates its unrestricted branch, so the relationship returns records the scope was meant to exclude. The fix fails the read with an error when a parent(...) reference cannot be resolved, instead of defaulting to nil. This issue affects ash: from 3.13.2 before 3.32.2. | |||||