Total
400174 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-8496 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 6.1 MEDIUM | ||
| A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in Alinto SOGo, version 5.12.7. A maliciously crafted ICS calendar invitation files allows arbitrary JavaScript execution within the authenticated SOGo webmail session. The issue occurs because SVG content embedded in the description field of an ICS file, with an onrepeat event handler, is insufficiently sanitized before being rendered in the webmail interface. A remote attacker can execute JavaScript in the victim's browser when the malicious calendar invite is viewed. Successful exploitation may allow mailbox access, email and contact theft, session hijacking, and other actions allowed by an authenticated user. | |||||
| CVE-2026-7656 | 1 Zephyrproject | 1 Zephyr | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery handlers in subsys/net/ip/ipv6_nbr.c (handle_ra_input, handle_ns_input, handle_na_input) used an incorrect boolean expression that combined the RFC 4861 validity checks with the ICMPv6 code check using the wrong operator precedence: the form was ((length/hop/source/target checks) && (icmp_hdr->code != 0)). Because every legitimate ND message carries ICMPv6 code 0, an attacker setting code == 0 (the normal value) caused the entire predicate to evaluate false, so the packet was never dropped and all of the other checks were silently skipped. The bypassed checks include the mandatory Hop Limit == 255 verification (which proves an ND packet originated on-link and was not forwarded) and, for Router Advertisements, the requirement that the source be a link-local address, as well as multicast-target sanity checks. As a result, an adjacent on-link attacker — and, because the Hop-Limit-255 guard is bypassed, potentially a remote/off-link attacker whose packets would otherwise be rejected — can have forged Router Advertisement, Neighbor Solicitation, and Neighbor Advertisement messages accepted. A forged RA lets the attacker reconfigure the victim's default router, on-link prefixes (SLAAC), MTU, reachable/retransmit timers, and (with CONFIG_NET_IPV6_RA_RDNSS) DNS servers, while forged NS/NA enable neighbor-cache poisoning, enabling man-in-the-middle, traffic redirection, and denial of service. The flaw is an input-validation/authentication weakness rather than a memory-safety issue: the underlying packet-parsing primitives (net_pkt_get_data, net_pkt_read, net_pkt_skip) are independently bounds-safe and the validated length is the true buffer length, so skipping the length check causes no out-of-bounds access. The defect has existed since the logic was introduced in 2018 and shipped in all releases through v4.4.0; it is fixed by splitting the condition so any failing check drops the packet. | |||||
| CVE-2026-6235 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL | ||
| The Sendmachine for WordPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass via the 'manage_admin_requests' function in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.20. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to overwrite the plugin's SMTP configuration, which can be leveraged to intercept all outbound emails from the site (including password reset emails). | |||||
| CVE-2026-69125 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67321. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67321. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67321 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-69124 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67320. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67320. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67320 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-69123 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67319. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67319. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67319 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68948 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67318. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67318. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67318 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68947 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67317. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67317. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67317 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68946 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67315. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67315. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67315 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68944 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67316. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67316. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67316 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68943 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67314. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67314. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67314 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68942 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67313. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67313. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67313 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68941 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67312. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67312. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67312 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-68073 | 1 Apache | 1 Qpid Broker-j | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| A pre-authentication attacker could leverage type nesting to cause a StackOverflowError potentially leading to denial of service. This issue affects Apache Qpid Broker-J: through 10.0.1. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 10.1.0, which fixes the issue. | |||||
| CVE-2026-64640 | 1 Apache | 1 Polaris | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Apache Polaris did not consistently validate storage locations supplied during table and view registration. An authenticated principal with permission to register a table or view could, depending on the affected release and registration path, cause Polaris to use the catalog's storage credentials to read a caller-selected Iceberg metadata file before verifying that the file was within the catalog's allowed storage locations. If the catalog's underlying credentials could read an object outside that boundary, this could disclose limited information from the object. Polaris could also accept registration metadata located within an allowed location that contained references to storage locations outside the allowed boundary. This second condition did not itself cause Polaris to read the referenced external locations during registration. The demonstrated impact is limited to confidentiality. No unauthorized data modification or availability impact has been demonstrated. The server-side read requires a deployment using S3 credential vending and an object outside the allowed locations that the catalog's underlying storage credentials can read. Exploitation requires an authenticated principal with table- or view-registration privileges. | |||||
| CVE-2026-56699 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. Per Wazuh's Security Policy, vulnerabilities affecting only non-GA versions are not eligible for a CVE ID. | |||||
| CVE-2026-55688 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 4.0 MEDIUM | ||
| The AsyncHttpClient (AHC) library allows Java applications to easily execute HTTP requests and asynchronously process HTTP responses. In versions from 2.0.0 prior to 2.16.0 and from 3.0.0.Beta1 prior to 3.0.11, ThreadSafeCookieStore stored a cookie under the value of its Domain attribute without verifying that the responding host is allowed to set a cookie for that domain, leading to a cookie tossing / cookie injection issue. A host the client connects to can therefore plant a cookie scoped to an unrelated domain, and the client will then send that cookie on later requests to that domain. Applications that use a single AsyncHttpClient instance - and thus the default, shared CookieStore - to reach both an attacker-influenced host and a trusted host are impacted. This issue has been fixed in versions 2.16.0 and 3.0.11. | |||||
| CVE-2026-33181 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-33942. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-33942. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-33942 instead of this candidate. | |||||
| CVE-2026-21655 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Deserialization of untrusted data vulnerability in Johnson Control victor on Windows, Johnson Controls CCure 9000, and Johnson Controls Victor Application Server allows capec-586. This issue affects victor: before 8.0; CCure 9000: before 3.2; Victor Application Server: before 4.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-15325 | 1 Ibm | 1 Websphere Application Server | 2026-08-06 | N/A | 8.7 HIGH |
| IBM WebSphere Application Server and IBM WebSphere Application Server - Liberty is vulnerable to HTTP request smuggling due to improper handling of TRACE requests. | |||||