Total
396856 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-46377 | 2025-04-24 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46376 | 2025-04-24 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46375 | 2025-04-24 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46374 | 2025-04-24 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-3673 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2023-3092.. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2023-3092. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2023-3092. instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage. | |||||
| CVE-2025-46224 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46223 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46222 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46221 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46220 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46219 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46218 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46217 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-46216 | 2025-04-23 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||
| CVE-2025-3441 | 2025-04-22 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2724 | 2025-04-22 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: The code maintainer explains that "the only way to get an object of type GsfMSOleSortingKey is via gsf_msole_sorting_key_new which adds that extra zero element". | |||||
| CVE-2025-2723 | 2025-04-22 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: The code maintainer explains that "[the] call is invalid [as] the buffer pointed to by "data" must have "len" valid bytes." The documentation was fixed to make that clear. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2722 | 2025-04-22 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: The code maintainer explains that "[the] call is invalid [because] p_n_param is an input-output parameter indicating how big an array has already been allocated. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2721 | 2025-04-22 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: The code maintainer explains that "[the] call is invalid [as] the buffer pointed to by "data" must have "len" valid bytes." The documentation was fixed to make that clear. | |||||
| CVE-2025-43901 | 2025-04-19 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: Not used | |||||