Total
417646 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-96448 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 6.6 MEDIUM | ||
| A flaw was found in the Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP v2) feature of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. The issue occurs when the system checks if a delegated administrator has permission to assign a specific role to a user. Because the check does not look inside composite roles to see what other permissions they contain, an administrator with limited rights can assign a role that secretly includes full administrative control. This allows the attacker to gain complete management access over the entire realm. | |||||
| CVE-2026-96446 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 4.2 MEDIUM | ||
| A flaw was found in the Pushed Authorization Request PAR implementation of Keycloak. The issue occurs when the silent authentication path prompt=none is used, which allows the authorization process to skip certain steps if a user is already logged in. Due to this bypass, the security rule that ensures a pushed request URI is used only once is not enforced. An attacker could potentially reuse a request URI to obtain multiple authorization codes for a user who is already signed in, violating security standards like FAPI-2. | |||||
| CVE-2026-93399 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 9.1 CRITICAL | ||
| The Bookly plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in versions up to, and including, 28.2 via the 'bookly_get_form_id', 'bookly_render_complete', 'bookly_add_to_calendar' and 'bookly_rollback_order' AJAX actions. This is due to the 'bookly_get_form_id' handler blindly storing the attacker-controlled 'order_id' from the submitted form_data into a new booking session, which the 'bookly_render_complete' handler then trusts to look up and return the corresponding Order's secret token without verifying that the current session created that order. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to enumerate sequential order IDs, disclose other customers' order tokens, retrieve calendar/appointment information via 'bookly_add_to_calendar' and permanently delete arbitrary non-completed bookings via 'bookly_rollback_order', which cascade-deletes the customer_appointment and (when no other customers are attached) the underlying appointment. | |||||
| CVE-2026-92680 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM | ||
| Araxis Merge for Windows version 2011.4074 through 2026.0 stores user-configured credentials for remote servers in the Windows registry and does not apply sufficient cryptographic protection. An authenticated, non-administrative attacker could retrieve and unencrypt all credentials the target user has stored in Merge. | |||||
| CVE-2026-92289 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 9.1 CRITICAL | ||
| Lemonldap::NG::Portal versions from 2.23.0 before 2.23.4 for Perl allow a PKCE bypass for public Relying Parties in "PKCE or secret" mode because checkEndPointAuthenticationCredentials does not verify the client secret. With oidcRPMetaDataOptionsRequirePKCE set to 2, the authorization endpoint issues a code even when the request carries no code_challenge, and token() admits the exchange as long as a challenge was stored or an authentication method was returned for the caller. checkEndPointAuthenticationCredentials() skips the secret comparison for a Relying Party marked public and still returns the method deduced from the request, so any Basic or form credential satisfies the secret branch. validatePKCEChallenge() then passes, because neither a challenge nor a verifier is present. An attacker who intercepts an authorization code issued to a public Relying Party can exchange it for the user's access, ID and refresh tokens by replaying the client_id with an arbitrary secret, which is the attack PKCE prevents. Dynamic client registration creates every Relying Party in this mode. | |||||
| CVE-2026-89276 | 3 Adobe, Linux, Microsoft | 3 Campaign, Linux Kernel, Windows | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 9.9 CRITICAL |
| Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by an Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. A low-privileged attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-88840 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| BusyBox TLS get_client_hello() reads past the end of the input buffer when parsing a truncated ClientHello message. | |||||
| CVE-2026-84724 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 6.6 MEDIUM | ||
| An argument-injection flaw was found in the Ansible Automation Platform automation-controller system-job subsystem. The system-job template launch endpoint stores a user-supplied "days" variable without running the integer validation defined elsewhere for that field, and the dispatcher flattens the management-command argument list into a single string with spaces before the job runner re-splits it, so spaces in the value become additional command-line arguments. Because system jobs are executed in-process on the control node without the container isolation applied to all other job types, an authenticated user with superuser privileges can inject arbitrary arguments — including Python's path option — into the control-plane awx-manage process, controlling its argument vector and the first entry of its module search path. Full remote code execution requires an additional import gadget that is not present in the current management commands, so the demonstrated impact is argument injection with control of the process search path rather than confirmed code execution. | |||||
| CVE-2026-84717 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| A flaw was found in the Ansible Automation Platform automation-controller. The unauthenticated Bitbucket Data Center webhook receiver skips HMAC signature verification for diagnostics:ping events after it has already looked up the target template, causing the endpoint to return HTTP 200 for a template that has a Bitbucket DC webhook configured and HTTP 403 otherwise. An unauthenticated remote attacker can use this response discrepancy as an oracle to enumerate which Job Template and Workflow Job Template IDs have Bitbucket DC webhooks configured, without knowing the secret webhook_key. | |||||
| CVE-2026-84706 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 7.6 HIGH | ||
| A flaw was found in Ansible Automation Platform's automation-controller. The custom Credential Type environment-variable injector validates variable names against a deny-list (an ANSIBLE_* prefix check plus a fixed ENV_BLOCKLIST) that omits process-hijacking loader variables such as BASH_ENV, ENV, LD_PRELOAD, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, PYTHONSTARTUP and GIT_SSH_COMMAND. Combined with the credential file injector, a privileged user can write an attacker-controlled script into the execution environment and point BASH_ENV at it, obtaining arbitrary code execution inside the execution-environment container for any job that attaches a credential of that type. | |||||
| CVE-2026-84499 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 7.7 HIGH | ||
| A flaw was found in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform's automation- controller. Survey questions of type password are write-only and stored encrypted, displayed only as a placeholder on read. When a schedule or workflow job template node is revalidated against a tightened survey specification, the controller decrypts the stored password and includes its plaintext value in the minimum/maximum length validation error message returned in the HTTP response. A user with the delegated JobTemplate Admin role can tighten the survey length constraint and trigger revalidation of a schedule or node created by another, higher-privileged user, thereby recovering that user's stored password in plaintext. | |||||
| CVE-2026-83964 | 3 Adobe, Apple, Microsoft | 4 Connect, Connect For Mobile, Macos and 1 more | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 6.2 MEDIUM |
| Adobe Connect is affected by an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability that could lead to disclosure of sensitive memory. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to disclose sensitive information. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82013 | 3 Adobe, Linux, Microsoft | 3 Campaign, Linux Kernel, Windows | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 9.9 CRITICAL |
| Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. A low-privileged attacker could exploit this vulnerability to gain elevated access to internal resources. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-82003 | 3 Adobe, Linux, Microsoft | 3 Campaign, Linux Kernel, Windows | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 8.5 HIGH |
| Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. A low-privileged attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code. Exploit depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-75699 | 3 Adobe, Linux, Microsoft | 3 Campaign, Linux Kernel, Windows | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 10.0 CRITICAL |
| Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by an Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-75684 | 3 Adobe, Apple, Microsoft | 4 Connect, Connect For Mobile, Macos and 1 more | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 9.3 CRITICAL |
| Adobe Connect is affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by an attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim's browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field, potentially gaining elevated access or control over the victim's account or session. Scope is changed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-71178 | 1 Dell | 1 Policy Manager For Secure Connect Gateway | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 3.7 LOW |
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Use of Non-Canonical URL Paths for Authorization Decisions vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Unauthorized access. | |||||
| CVE-2026-16591 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 7.2 HIGH | ||
| The WP Directory Kit WordPress plugin before 1.5.8 does not sanitize and escape some of its category and location fields before outputting them in page attributes, allowing users with a WP Directory Kit WordPress plugin before 1.5.8-specific listing-management role (and without the unfiltered_html capability) to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks that execute for any visitor of the affected page. | |||||
| CVE-2026-100720 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 8.7 HIGH | ||
| Froxlor 2.0.0 through 2.3.10 is vulnerable to stored cross-site scripting. When a customer (the lowest-privileged authenticated role) uploads an SSL certificate for one of their own domains, the Certificates API add()/update() methods parse it with openssl_x509_parse() and store the issuer organization (issuer['O']) value verbatim without sanitization. Froxlor's table-listing renderer then emits scalar cells through Twig's `raw` filter, disabling HTML auto-escaping, so when an administrator or reseller opens Domains > SSL certificates the attacker-supplied issuer value executes as script in the privileged user's session. This crosses a privilege boundary from customer to admin and can result in full administrator account takeover; because a Froxlor admin controls webserver, DNS, and PHP configuration applied by a cron job running as root, the issue can be further escalated to command execution as root on the managed server. The issue is fixed in Froxlor 2.3.12. | |||||
| CVE-2026-100719 | 2026-09-26 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| Froxlor versions before 2.3.12 contain a credential disclosure vulnerability in the DirProtections.listing API command that returns htpasswd password hashes. Authenticated API users can retrieve bcrypt password hashes for protected-directory users, enabling offline cracking attempts and exposure of reused credentials. | |||||