| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A security flaw has been discovered in efforthye fast-filesystem-mcp up to 3.5.1. The affected element is the function handleGetDiskUsage of the file src/index.ts. Performing a manipulation results in command injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet. |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nvme: fix admin queue leak on controller reset
When nvme_alloc_admin_tag_set() is called during a controller reset,
a previous admin queue may still exist. Release it properly before
allocating a new one to avoid orphaning the old queue.
This fixes a regression introduced by commit 03b3bcd319b3 ("nvme: fix
admin request_queue lifetime"). |
| A flaw has been found in Tenda CH22 1.0.0.1. The affected element is the function FormWriteFacMac of the file /goform/WriteFacMac. Executing a manipulation of the argument mac can lead to command injection. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. |
| Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling vulnerability in gleam-wisp wisp allows a denial of service via multipart form body parsing.
The multipart_body function bypasses configured max_body_size and max_files_size limits. When a multipart boundary is not present in a chunk, the parser takes the MoreRequiredForBody path, which appends the chunk to the output but passes the quota unchanged to the recursive call. Only the final chunk containing the boundary is counted via decrement_quota. The same pattern exists in multipart_headers, where MoreRequiredForHeaders recurses without calling decrement_body_quota.
An unauthenticated attacker can exhaust server memory or disk by sending arbitrarily large multipart form submissions in a single HTTP request.
This issue affects wisp: from 0.2.0 before 2.2.2. |
| A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco IMC could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with admin-level privileges to perform command injection attacks on an affected system and execute arbitrary commands as the root user.
This vulnerability is due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted commands to the web-based management interface of the affected software. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying operating system as the root user. Cisco has assigned this vulnerability a Security Impact Rating (SIR) of High, rather than Medium as the score indicates, because additional security implications could occur once the attacker has become root. |
| A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco IMC could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with read-only privileges to perform command injection attacks on an affected system and execute arbitrary commands as the root user.
This vulnerability is due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted commands to the web-based management interface of the affected software. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying operating system as the root user. |
| A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco IMC could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with admin-level privileges to perform command injection attacks on an affected system and execute arbitrary commands as the root user.
This vulnerability is due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted commands to the web-based management interface of the affected software. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying operating system as the root user. Cisco has assigned this vulnerability a Security Impact Rating (SIR) of High, rather than Medium as the score indicates, because additional security implications could occur once the attacker has become root. |
| A vulnerability in the REST API and web UI of Cisco Nexus Dashboard Fabric Controller (NDFC) could allow an authenticated, low-privileged, remote attacker to perform a command injection attack against an affected device.
This vulnerability is due to improper user authorization and insufficient validation of command arguments. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by submitting crafted commands to an affected REST API endpoint or through the web UI. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the CLI of a Cisco NDFC-managed device with network-admin privileges.
Note: This vulnerability does not affect Cisco NDFC when it is configured for storage area network (SAN) controller deployment. |
| A vulnerability was identified in Nothings stb up to 1.22. The impacted element is the function setup_free of the file stb_vorbis.c. The manipulation leads to allocation of resources. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. |
| IBM Aspera Shares 1.9.9 through 1.11.0 does not properly rate limit the frequency that an authenticated user can send emails, which could result in email flooding or a denial of service. |
| AIOHTTP is an asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python. Prior to version 3.13.4, for some multipart form fields, aiohttp read the entire field into memory before checking client_max_size. This issue has been patched in version 3.13.4. |
| AIOHTTP is an asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python. Prior to version 3.13.4, a response with an excessive number of multipart headers may be allowed to use more memory than intended, potentially allowing a DoS vulnerability. This issue has been patched in version 3.13.4. |
| AIOHTTP is an asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python. Prior to version 3.13.4, an unbounded DNS cache could result in excessive memory usage possibly resulting in a DoS situation. This issue has been patched in version 3.13.4. |
| AIOHTTP is an asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python. Prior to version 3.13.4, insufficient restrictions in header/trailer handling could cause uncapped memory usage. This issue has been patched in version 3.13.4. |
| A command injection vulnerability in the component /jmreport/show of jeecg boot v3.0.0 to v3.5.3 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted HTTP request. |
| Ridvay Code's command auto-approval module contains a critical OS command injection vulnerability that renders its whitelist security mechanism completely ineffective. The system relies on fragile regular expressions to parse command structures; while it attempts to intercept dangerous operations, it fails to account for standard Shell command substitution Ridvay Code (specifically$(...)and backticks ...). An attacker can construct a command such as git log --grep="$(malicious_command)", forcing Syntx to misidentify it as a safe git operation and automatically approve it. The underlying Shell prioritizes the execution of the malicious code injected within the arguments, resulting in Remote Code Execution without any user interaction. |
| In its design for automatic terminal command execution, Sixth offers two options: Execute safe commands and Execute all commands. The description for the former states that commands determined by the model to be safe will be automatically executed, whereas if the model judges a command to be potentially destructive, it still requires user approval. However, this design is highly susceptible to prompt injection attacks. An attacker can employ a generic template to wrap any malicious command and mislead the model into misclassifying it as a 'safe' command, thereby bypassing the user approval requirement and resulting in arbitrary command execution. |
| In its design for automatic terminal command execution, HAI Build Code Generator offers two options: Execute safe commands and Execute all commands. The description for the former states that commands determined by the model to be safe will be automatically executed, whereas if the model judges a command to be potentially destructive, it still requires user approval. However, this design is highly susceptible to prompt injection attacks. An attacker can employ a generic template to wrap any malicious command and mislead the model into misclassifying it as a 'safe' command, thereby bypassing the user approval requirement and resulting in arbitrary command execution. |
| A security vulnerability has been detected in Totolink A3300R 17.0.0cu.557_b20221024. Impacted is the function setStaticRoute of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi. Such manipulation of the argument ip leads to command injection. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. |
| Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') vulnerability in Marketing Fire Widget Options widget-options allows OS Command Injection.This issue affects Widget Options: from n/a through <= 4.1.0. |
