Export limit exceeded: 10196 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (10196 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-49396 | 1 Nezhahq | 1 Nezha | 2026-06-13 | 7.1 High |
| Nezha Monitoring is a self-hostable, lightweight, servers and websites monitoring and O&M tool. From version 1.0.0 to before version 2.0.14, cross-site GET request can trigger stored cron commands on a victim's agents. This issue has been patched in version 2.0.14. | ||||
| CVE-2026-54359 | 1 Misp | 1 Misp | 2026-06-12 | N/A |
| MISP contains an insecure default configuration in which the Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header control is disabled. When this setting is disabled, state-changing requests such as POST, PUT, or AJAX requests are not restricted based on the browser-provided Sec-Fetch-Site header. A remote unauthenticated attacker could craft a malicious web page that causes an authenticated MISP user’s browser to issue cross-site requests to MISP automation endpoints. If successful, the forged requests may be processed with the privileges of the victim user, potentially allowing unauthorized modification of MISP data or configuration. Enabling Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header mitigates this issue, although operators of multi-homed MISP deployments should validate the setting before enforcing it. | ||||
| CVE-2022-44630 | 2 Wordpress, Yith | 2 Wordpress, Yith Woocommerce Product Slider Carousel | 2026-06-12 | 4.6 Medium |
| Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in YITH YITH WooCommerce Product Slider Carousel allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects YITH WooCommerce Product Slider Carousel: from n/a through 1.16.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-26237 | 2 Qnap, Qnap Systems | 2 Qumagie, Qumagie | 2026-06-12 | 7.5 High |
| A missing authorization vulnerability has been reported to affect QuMagie. The remote attackers can then exploit the vulnerability to access unauthorized data or perform unauthorized actions. We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version: QuMagie 2.9.0 and later | ||||
| CVE-2026-48612 | 1 Phpbb | 1 Phpbb | 2026-06-12 | N/A |
| Improper state verification in the OAuth implementation could allow an attacker to manipulate the authentication flow and cause a victim’s account to be linked to an attacker-controlled account. This can result in unauthorized account linking and potential account takeover. | ||||
| CVE-2025-30459 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2026-06-12 | 5.5 Medium |
| A privacy issue was addressed by removing the vulnerable code. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4. An app may be able to access sensitive user data. | ||||
| CVE-2026-53736 | 2 Bplugins, Wordpress | 2 Easy Twitter Feed, Wordpress | 2026-06-11 | 4.3 Medium |
| Easy Twitter Feeds before 1.2.13 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the duplicate_post action handler that lacks nonce verification. Attackers can trick an authenticated user into visiting a crafted link that duplicates any post regardless of post type. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32110 | 2 Magepeopleteam, Wordpress | 2 Wpevently, Wordpress | 2026-06-11 | 4.3 Medium |
| Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Magepeople inc. WpEvently allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects WpEvently: from n/a through 4.1.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-53739 | 3 Duplicate Post Project, Wordpress, Yoast | 3 Duplicate Post, Wordpress, Yoast Duplicate Post | 2026-06-11 | 4.3 Medium |
| Yoast Duplicate Post through 4.6 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the duplicate_post_dismiss_notice handler, which verifies no nonce or capability. Attackers can trick any authenticated user into sending a request that sets the duplicate_post_show_notice site option, suppressing admin notices network-wide. | ||||
| CVE-2022-47150 | 2 Wedevs, Wordpress | 2 Woocommerce Conversion Tracking, Wordpress | 2026-06-11 | 4.3 Medium |
| Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in weDevs WooCommerce Conversion Tracking allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects WooCommerce Conversion Tracking: from n/a through 2.0.10. | ||||
| CVE-2026-34181 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-06-10 | 7.4 High |
| Issue Summary: The PKCS#12 file processing fails to perform sufficient input validation for files that use Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1) integrity mechanism allowing a certificate and private key forgery. Impact Summary: An attacker impersonating a user can cause a service reading PKCS#12 files to accept forged certificates and private keys with a 1 in 256 probability. If a service accepting PKCS#12 files is using passwords for authenticating the received files, the attacker can create unencrypted PKCS#12 files that use PBMAC1 authentication that specifies an HMAC key of only one byte, allowing them to craft a file that will be accepted with a 1 in 256 probability. That would then cause the service to accept a certificate and private key controlled by the attacker. The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. | ||||
| CVE-2026-34182 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-06-10 | 9.1 Critical |
| Issue Summary: Cryptographic Message Services (CMS) processing fails to perform sufficient input validation on the cipher and tag length fields of AuthEnvelopedData containers, leading to various potential compromises. Impact Summary: Attackers making use of these vulnerabilities may achieve key-equivalent functionality for a given CMS recipient and/or bypass integrity validation for a given message. In one use case, an attacker may send a CMS message containing AuthEnvelopedData with the cipher specified as a non-AEAD cipher. OpenSSL erroneously allows this selection, and attempts to decrypt and validate the message. An on-path attacker who captures one legitimate AES-GCM AuthEnvelopedData addressed to the victim can re-emit it with the recipientInfos set left byte-for-byte intact, so the victim's private key still unwraps the genuine CEK (the content-encryption key), but with the inner OID rewritten to AES-256-OFB (Output Feedback Mode, an unauthenticated keystream mode) and with an attacker-chosen IV and ciphertext. The victim initializes AES-256-OFB under the real CEK, never consults the MAC field, and CMS_decrypt() returns success. If the application under attack responds to the attacker with any indicator showing success or failure of the decryption effort, it is possible for the attacker to use this as an oracle to obtain key equivalent functionality for the CEK used for the chosen recipient of the message. In another use case, an attacker can reduce the tag length of the chosen AEAD cipher for a given AuthEnvelopedData container to be a single byte long, allowing an attacker to brute force CMS decryption, producing an integrity bypass for applications that trust CMS_decrypt() to reject modified content. The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2025-58468 | 1 Qnap Systems | 1 Notification Center | 2026-06-10 | N/A |
| A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability has been reported to affect Notification Center. The remote attackers can then exploit the vulnerability to gain privileges or hijack user identities. We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version: Notification Center 1.10.0.3291 and later | ||||
| CVE-2026-25699 | 1 Apache | 1 Answer | 2026-06-10 | 6.1 Medium |
| Exposure of Private Personal Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Apache Answer. This issue affects Apache Answer: through 2.0.0. Timeline-related APIs lacked proper authorization checks, allowing regular authenticated users to access deleted, private, or unapproved content and its revision history. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.0.1, which fixes the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-11195 | 4 Apple, Google, Linux and 1 more | 4 Macos, Chrome, Linux Kernel and 1 more | 2026-06-10 | 6.5 Medium |
| Inappropriate implementation in MHTML in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium) | ||||
| CVE-2026-11194 | 4 Apple, Google, Linux and 1 more | 4 Macos, Chrome, Linux Kernel and 1 more | 2026-06-10 | 6.5 Medium |
| Inappropriate implementation in Network in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium) | ||||
| CVE-2026-39170 | 1 Sem-cms | 1 Semcms | 2026-06-10 | 6.3 Medium |
| SemCms 5.0 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via crafted POST request to /admin/semcms_user.php. | ||||
| CVE-2026-42770 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2026-06-10 | 3.7 Low |
| Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership. Impact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor (p−1)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the victim's private key after a small number of key exchange attempts. When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the subgroup membership check Y^q ≡ 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer's own q parameter, not the local key's q. The peer's domain parameters are then matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value of q is not compared. A malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p, g, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public value Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only r distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime factor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private key (Lim–Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack). The realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with long-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications using X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this issue was assigned Low severity. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are affected by this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-10553 | 2 Weaverlancegmailcom, Wordpress | 2 Jquery Hover Footnotes, Wordpress | 2026-06-09 | 4.3 Medium |
| The jQuery Hover Footnotes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the jqFootnotes_options_subpanel function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's settings with arbitrary values that, because option values such as jqfoot_anchor_open, jqfoot_anchor_close, and jqfoot_title are echoed unescaped into frontend page content, can be chained into persistent Cross-Site Scripting affecting all site visitors via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. Successful exploitation of the CSRF vulnerability can be chained into stored Cross-Site Scripting, as the overwritten option values are persisted via update_option() without sanitization and rendered unescaped on the frontend. | ||||
| CVE-2026-8904 | 2 Wordpress, Yuluma | 2 Wordpress, Fastpicker, An Order Picker And Order Management System (oms) For Woocommerce On Steroids | 2026-06-09 | 4.3 Medium |
| The FastPicker, an order picker and order management system (oms) for WooCommerce on steroids plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the settingsPage function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify the plugin's settings, including toggling the webhook integration and changing the FastPicker and KDZ API URLs via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||