| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Solaris product of Oracle Systems (component: Image Packaging System). The supported version that is affected is 11.4. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via TLS to compromise Oracle Solaris. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle Solaris accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 3.1 (Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N). |
| GPUStack is an open-source GPU cluster manager for AI model serving and GPU instance provisioning. Prior to 2.2.0, get_current_user in gpustack/api/auth.py treated a loopback request source as the built-in administrator when force_auth_localhost was false, which was the default. A remote request could appear to originate from 127.0.0.1 because client_ip_getter accepted a same-host reverse proxy peer or a client-supplied X-GPUStack-Real-IP loopback value. The bypass allowed unauthenticated administrative access, including user and model changes, persistent administrator API-key creation, disclosure of worker and cloud-provider secrets, and code execution through POST /v2/inference-backends/from-yaml. Exploitation was observed in the wild against a 2.1.1 deployment. This issue is fixed in version 2.2.0. |
| A missing integrity verification vulnerability exists in the API of HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow a low-privileged authenticated attacker to gain elevated privileges on the affected system. |
| SuperTokens Core is an open source authentication server. From 11.3.0 until 11.3.8, 11.4.8, 12.0.11, 12.1.2, 12.2.1, and 12.3.1, a licensed deployment with a configured SAML client can authenticate an identity from an assertion that did not satisfy the audience check. When the identity provider uses assertion-level signing, an attacker who has a still-valid IdP-signed assertion naming the victim for any audience and the attacker's own valid assertion for the target audience can combine them because validateSamlResponseAudience accepts an audience from one assertion while extractAllClaims takes the final NameID and attributes from another; response-level signing does not expose this multi-assertion variant. Independently, an assertion from an identity provider configured for the target deployment but issued to another SuperTokens deployment using the shared default saml_sp_entity_id can satisfy the target's audience check. Successful exploitation authenticates the attacker as the victim IdP user. This issue is fixed in versions 11.3.8, 11.4.8, 12.0.11, 12.1.2, 12.2.1, and 12.3.1. |
| SuperTokens Core is an open source authentication server. From 11.3.0 until 11.3.8, 11.4.8, 12.0.11, 12.1.2, 12.2.1, and 12.3.1, SAML.handleCallback does not consume RelayState, record assertion identifiers, or enforce Response.InResponseTo. In the SP-initiated flow, an attacker who obtains a legitimately issued, still-valid SAML response and its matching RelayState can resubmit the pair to /recipe/saml/callback before the assertion's NotOnOrAfter time; in the IdP-initiated flow, the assertion can be replayed without RelayState. The missing Response.InResponseTo check also permits an in-progress login to be completed with an assertion for a different identity and fails to enforce allowIDPInitiatedLogin=false. The callback does not validate Destination or SubjectConfirmationData Recipient and NotOnOrAfter, and each accepted callback mints a fresh, independently redeemable authorization code carrying the captured user's identity. This issue is fixed in versions 11.3.8, 11.4.8, 12.0.11, 12.1.2, 12.2.1, and 12.3.1. |
| SuperTokens Core is an open source authentication server. From 11.3.0 until 11.3.7, 11.4.7, and 12.0.10, SAML.verifySamlResponseSignature calls OpenSAML SignatureValidator.validate without first applying SAMLSignatureProfileValidator. The Core can therefore accept a cryptographically valid signature that references a different XML element from the Response or Assertion whose NameID and attributes are used for authentication. An ordinary user of the configured identity provider can move a genuinely signed element elsewhere in the document while supplying an attacker-authored identity-bearing element, causing XML Signature Wrapping authentication as another IdP user. Both response-level and assertion-level signing paths are affected, and SP-initiated login remains reachable without enabling allowIDPInitiatedLogin. This issue is fixed in versions 11.3.7, 11.4.7, and 12.0.10. |
| Insufficient protection of communications in Progress WS_FTP Server versions prior to 2025.0.5 could allow a network attacker to intercept sensitive information or modify requests when unencrypted connections are used. |
| A missing integrity verification vulnerability exists in HPE Networking Fabric Composer. Successful exploitation could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to execute arbitrary code on the affected system. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto through 0.26.0-alpha.1 and hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 contain a DNSSEC validation flaw that accepts a response as a positive answer when any valid RRset appears in the answer section, without checking that the RRset is responsive to the query. Attackers can supply signed but unrelated RRsets so that responses lacking matching records are validated as positive answers instead of as no-data responses. |
| The validating recursive resolver and validating forwarder in Hickory DNS (hickory-server) 0.25.0 before 0.26.2 do not check whether the SOA record passed DNSSEC validation when assembling NXDOMAIN or NODATA responses. An attacker able to supply forged DNS responses can have a forged SOA record returned to clients with the AD bit set, misleading clients that rely on the server's DNSSEC validation. |
| The recursive resolver in Hickory DNS hickory-recursor 0.25.0 through 0.25.2 and hickory-resolver 0.26.0 before 0.26.2 does not apply out-of-bailiwick filtering to negative responses. Attackers able to supply crafted negative responses can include out-of-bailiwick records to facilitate cache poisoning and more easily exploit other DNSSEC verification flaws. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 and hickory-proto through 0.26.0-alpha.1 accept NSEC and NSEC3 records for DNSSEC nonexistence proofs when any other record with the same owner name passes signature validation. Attackers able to supply DNS responses can mix validly signed records with bogus same-name NSEC or NSEC3 records of different types in the authority section to forge nonexistence proofs. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 and hickory-proto through 0.26.0-alpha.1 fail to verify, per RFC 6840 ยง4.4, that an NSEC or NSEC3 record denying a DS RRset also proves the delegation's NS record exists. Attackers can reuse child-side NSEC or NSEC3 records to fake an insecure delegation and forge child-zone records. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto through 0.26.0-alpha.1 and hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 contain an NSEC validation flaw that returns a secure proof for NXDOMAIN responses when the covering NSEC's Next Domain Name is a strict descendant of the query name, which actually proves the name exists as an empty non-terminal. On-path attackers can flip the unsigned rcode of a genuine signed NODATA response from NOERROR to NXDOMAIN, causing validators to accept forged nonexistence of the name. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto 0.25 through 0.26.0-alpha.1 and hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 contain a DNSSEC validation flaw in the validating recursor's NSEC3 handler, which matches the closest encloser by hash alone without checking the type bitmap and so accepts parent-side ancestor-delegation NSEC3 records as proof of nonexistence. An attacker who delivers one response built from genuinely signed parent NSEC3 records can cause NXDOMAIN or NODATA to be cached with AD=1, denying resolution of existing names at and below the zone cut. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto through 0.26.0-alpha.1 and hickory-net 0.26.0-beta.1 before 0.26.2 contain a DNSSEC validation flaw in the validating recursor's NSEC handler that accepts parent-side ancestor-delegation NSEC records as proof of nonexistence for names below the zone cut. An on-path attacker, rogue parent nameserver, or attacker winning a port and TXID race can deliver one forged NXDOMAIN response built from genuinely signed parent NSEC records, causing authenticated denial of existing child-zone names cached for the negative TTL. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto before 0.26.0-beta.1 and hickory-net before 0.26.2 contain a DNSSEC validation bypass because verify_rrsets() ignores DNS class when partitioning RRsets, so non-IN records skip signature verification yet are marked secure when the IN records verify. Attackers able to supply DNS responses can include forged CH or HS class records, including DS records, to authenticate any DNSKEY and forge child zone responses. |
| Hickory DNS hickory-proto 0.1 through 0.25.0-alpha.3 and hickory-net before 0.26.2 contain a DNSSEC validation bypass because the validator verifies an RRSIG against the DNSKEY of whatever name appears in its Signer's Name field without checking that this name is the zone containing the RRset. Attackers controlling any secure zone can produce valid signatures over arbitrary records in unrelated zones, which resolvers, recursors, and clients using DnssecDnsHandle accept as authenticated. |
| http.cookiejar.CookieJar deleted a stored cookie when a response carried an
already expired Set-Cookie header for it, using the Domain and Path
attributes from the header without consulting the cookie policy. A server
could therefore delete cookies belonging to other domains from a shared
cookie jar, such as the one used by urllib's HTTPCookieProcessor. The fix
consults the cookie policy before an expired cookie may delete an existing
one, as required by RFC 6265 section 5.3. |
| Munshi (by Petpooja) before 2026-06-30 contained a payment bypass vulnerability in its subscription payment webhook at POST /api/payment/order/webhook, which lacks webhook authentication, cryptographic signature verification, source validation, and independent server-side confirmation with the payment provider. A remote, unauthenticated attacker can submit a forged payment-success notification referencing an order obtained from the payment-status redirect URL, causing the backend to mark the subscription as paid/active and granting paid access without an actual successful payment. |
