Total
398466 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-32816 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 3.1 LOW | ||
| CodeLit CourseLit before 0.57.5 allows Parameter Tampering via a payment plan associated with the wrong entity. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32815 | 1 Infoblox | 1 Netmri | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in Infoblox NETMRI before 7.6.1. Authentication Bypass via a Hardcoded credential can occur. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32814 | 1 Infoblox | 1 Netmri | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| An issue was discovered in Infoblox NETMRI before 7.6.1. Unauthenticated SQL Injection can occur. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32813 | 1 Infoblox | 1 Netmri | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 7.2 HIGH |
| An issue was discovered in Infoblox NETMRI before 7.6.1. Remote Unauthenticated Command Injection can occur. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32809 | 1 Wwnorton | 1 Inquizitive | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 6.4 MEDIUM |
| W. W. Norton InQuizitive through 2025-04-08 allows students to conduct stored XSS attacks against educators via a bonus description, feedback.choice_fb[], or question_id. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32808 | 1 Wwnorton | 1 Inquizitive | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 7.7 HIGH |
| W. W. Norton InQuizitive through 2025-04-08 allows students to insert arbitrary records of their quiz performance into the backend, because only client-side access control exists. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32807 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| A path traversal vulnerability in FusionDirectory before 1.5 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files on the host that end with .png (and .svg or .xpm for some configurations) via the icon parameter of a GET request to geticon.php. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32803 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 4.0 MEDIUM | ||
| In some cases, Kea log files or lease files may be world-readable. This issue affects Kea versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.1, 2.6.0 through 2.6.2, and 2.7.0 through 2.7.8. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32802 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 6.1 MEDIUM | ||
| Kea configuration and API directives can be used to overwrite arbitrary files, subject to permissions granted to Kea. Many common configurations run Kea as root, leave the API entry points unsecured by default, and/or place the control sockets in insecure paths. This issue affects Kea versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.1, 2.6.0 through 2.6.2, and 2.7.0 through 2.7.8. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32801 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH | ||
| Kea configuration and API directives can be used to load a malicious hook library. Many common configurations run Kea as root, leave the API entry points unsecured by default, and/or place the control sockets in insecure paths. This issue affects Kea versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.1, 2.6.0 through 2.6.2, and 2.7.0 through 2.7.8. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32800 | 1 Anaconda | 1 Conda-build | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Conda-build contains commands and tools to build conda packages. Prior to version 25.3.0, the pyproject.toml lists conda-index as a Python dependency. This package is not published in PyPI. An attacker could claim this namespace and upload arbitrary (malicious) code to the package, and then exploit pip install commands by injecting the malicious dependency in the solve. This issue has been fixed in version 25.3.0. A workaround involves using --no-deps for pip install-ing the project from the repository. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32799 | 1 Anaconda | 1 Conda-build | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Conda-build contains commands and tools to build conda packages. Prior to version 25.4.0, the conda-build processing logic is vulnerable to path traversal (Tarslip) attacks due to improper sanitization of tar entry paths. Attackers can craft tar archives containing entries with directory traversal sequences to write files outside the intended extraction directory. This could lead to arbitrary file overwrites, privilege escalation, or code execution if sensitive locations are targeted. This issue has been patched in version 25.4.0. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32798 | 1 Anaconda | 1 Conda-build | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Conda-build contains commands and tools to build conda packages. Prior to version 25.4.0, the conda-build recipe processing logic has been found to be vulnerable to arbitrary code execution due to unsafe evaluation of recipe selectors. Currently, conda-build uses the eval function to process embedded selectors in meta.yaml files. This approach evaluates user-defined expressions without proper sanitization, which allows arbitrary code to be executed during the build process. As a result, the integrity of the build environment is compromised, and unauthorized commands or file operations may be performed. The vulnerability stems from the inherent risk of using eval() on untrusted input in a context intended to control dynamic build configurations. By directly interpreting selector expressions, conda-build creates a potential execution pathway for malicious code, violating security assumptions. This issue has been patched in version 25.4.0. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32797 | 1 Anaconda | 1 Conda-build | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 7.0 HIGH |
| Conda-build contains commands and tools to build conda packages. Prior to version 25.3.1, the write_build_scripts function in conda-build creates the temporary build script conda_build.sh with overly permissive file permissions (0o766), allowing write access to all users. Attackers with filesystem access can exploit a race condition to overwrite the script before execution, enabling arbitrary code execution under the victim's privileges. This risk is significant in shared environments, potentially leading to full system compromise. Even with non-static directory names, attackers can monitor parent directories for file creation events. The brief window between script creation (with insecure permissions) and execution allows rapid overwrites. Directory names can also be inferred via timestamps or logs, and automation enables exploitation even with semi-randomized paths by acting within milliseconds of detection. This issue has been patched in version 25.3.1. A workaround involves restricting conda_build.sh permissions from 0o766 to 0o700 (owner-only read/write/execute). Additionally, use atomic file creation (write to a temporary randomized filename and rename atomically) to minimize the race condition window. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32796 | 1 Langgenius | 1 Dify | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to version 0.6.12, a vulnerability was identified in the DIFY where normal users can enable or disable apps through the API, even though the web UI button for this action is disabled and normal users are not permitted to make such changes. This access control flaw allows non-admin users to make unauthorized changes, which can disrupt the functionality and availability of the APPS. This issue has been patched in version 0.6.12. A workaround for this vulnerability involves updating the API access control mechanisms to enforce stricter user role permissions and implementing role-based access controls (RBAC) to ensure that only users with admin privileges can send enable or disable requests for apps. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32795 | 1 Langgenius | 1 Dify | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to version 0.6.12, a vulnerability was identified in the DIFY where normal users are improperly granted permissions to edit APP names, descriptions and icons. This access control flaw allows non-admin users to modify app details, despite being restricted from viewing apps, which poses a security risk to the integrity of the application. This issue has been patched in version 0.6.12. A workaround for this vulnerability involves updating the access control mechanisms to enforce stricter user role permissions and implementing role-based access controls (RBAC) to ensure that only users with admin privileges can modify app details. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32794 | 1 Open-emr | 1 Openemr | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 7.6 HIGH |
| OpenEMR is a free and open source electronic health records and medical practice management application. A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in versions prior to 7.0.3.4 allows any authenticated user with patient creation privileges to inject arbitrary JavaScript code into the system by entering malicious payloads in the First and Last Name fields during patient registration. This code is later executed when viewing the patient's encounter under Orders → Procedure Orders. Version 7.0.3.4 contains a patch for the issue. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32793 | 1 Cilium | 1 Cilium | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 4.0 MEDIUM |
| Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Versions 1.15.0 to 1.15.15, 1.16.0 to 1.16.8, and 1.17.0 to 1.17.2, are vulnerable when using Wireguard transparent encryption in a Cilium cluster, packets that originate from a terminating endpoint can leave the source node without encryption due to a race condition in how traffic is processed by Cilium. This issue has been patched in versions 1.15.16, 1.16.9, and 1.17.3. There are no workarounds available for this issue. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32792 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | N/A | ||
| SES safely executes third-party JavaScript 'strict' mode programs in compartments that have no excess authority in their global scope. Prior to version 1.12.0, web pages and web extensions using `ses` and the Compartment API to evaluate third-party code in an isolated execution environment that have also elsewhere used `const`, `let`, and `class` bindings in the top-level scope of a `<script>` tag will have inadvertently revealed these bindings in the lexical scope of third-party code. This issue has been patched in version 1.12.0. Workarounds for this issue involve either avoiding top-level `let`, `const`, or `class` bindings in `<script>` tags, or change these to `var` bindings to be reflected on `globalThis`. | |||||
| CVE-2025-32791 | 2026-06-17 | N/A | 4.3 MEDIUM | ||
| The Backstage Scaffolder plugin houses types and utilities for building scaffolder-related modules. A vulnerability in the Backstage permission plugin backend allows callers to extract some information about the conditional decisions returned by the permission policy installed in the permission backend. If the permission system is not in use or if the installed permission policy does not use conditional decisions, there is no impact. This issue has been patched in version 0.6.0 of the permissions backend. A workaround includes having administrators of the permission policies ensure that they are crafted in such a way that conditional decisions do not contain any sensitive information. | |||||