Export limit exceeded: 346537 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 29902 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 23274 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (23274 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-4382 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Openshift | 2026-04-15 | 5.9 Medium |
| A flaw was found in systems utilizing LUKS-encrypted disks with GRUB configured for TPM-based auto-decryption. When GRUB is set to automatically decrypt disks using keys stored in the TPM, it reads the decryption key into system memory. If an attacker with physical access can corrupt the underlying filesystem superblock, GRUB will fail to locate a valid filesystem and enter rescue mode. At this point, the disk is already decrypted, and the decryption key remains loaded in system memory. This scenario may allow an attacker with physical access to access the unencrypted data without any further authentication, thereby compromising data confidentiality. Furthermore, the ability to force this state through filesystem corruption also presents a data integrity concern. | ||||
| CVE-2024-45336 | 1 Redhat | 8 Acm, Ceph Storage, Enterprise Linux and 5 more | 2026-04-15 | 6.1 Medium |
| The HTTP client drops sensitive headers after following a cross-domain redirect. For example, a request to a.com/ containing an Authorization header which is redirected to b.com/ will not send that header to b.com. In the event that the client received a subsequent same-domain redirect, however, the sensitive headers would be restored. For example, a chain of redirects from a.com/, to b.com/1, and finally to b.com/2 would incorrectly send the Authorization header to b.com/2. | ||||
| CVE-2024-43420 | 1 Redhat | 6 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 3 more | 2026-04-15 | 5.6 Medium |
| Exposure of sensitive information caused by shared microarchitectural predictor state that influences transient execution for some Intel Atom(R) processors may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable information disclosure via local access. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4340 | 1 Redhat | 5 Ansible Automation Platform, Openstack, Rhui and 2 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High |
| Passing a heavily nested list to sqlparse.parse() leads to a Denial of Service due to RecursionError. | ||||
| CVE-2024-6875 | 1 Redhat | 1 Jboss Data Grid | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| A vulnerability was found in the Infinispan component in Red Hat Data Grid. The REST compare API may have a buffer leak and an out of memory error can occur when sending continual requests with large POST data to the REST API. | ||||
| CVE-2024-11734 | 1 Redhat | 3 Build Keycloak, Jboss Enterprise Application Platform, Jbosseapxp | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| A denial of service vulnerability was found in Keycloak that could allow an administrative user with the right to change realm settings to disrupt the service. This action is done by modifying any of the security headers and inserting newlines, which causes the Keycloak server to write to a request that has already been terminated, leading to the failure of said request. | ||||
| CVE-2025-49179 | 1 Redhat | 7 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 4 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.3 High |
| A flaw was found in the X Record extension. The RecordSanityCheckRegisterClients function does not check for an integer overflow when computing request length, which allows a client to bypass length checks. | ||||
| CVE-2024-45337 | 1 Redhat | 15 Acm, Advanced Cluster Security, Cert Manager and 12 more | 2026-04-15 | 9.1 Critical |
| Applications and libraries which misuse connection.serverAuthenticate (via callback field ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback) may be susceptible to an authorization bypass. The documentation for ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback says that "A call to this function does not guarantee that the key offered is in fact used to authenticate." Specifically, the SSH protocol allows clients to inquire about whether a public key is acceptable before proving control of the corresponding private key. PublicKeyCallback may be called with multiple keys, and the order in which the keys were provided cannot be used to infer which key the client successfully authenticated with, if any. Some applications, which store the key(s) passed to PublicKeyCallback (or derived information) and make security relevant determinations based on it once the connection is established, may make incorrect assumptions. For example, an attacker may send public keys A and B, and then authenticate with A. PublicKeyCallback would be called only twice, first with A and then with B. A vulnerable application may then make authorization decisions based on key B for which the attacker does not actually control the private key. Since this API is widely misused, as a partial mitigation golang.org/x/cry...@v0.31.0 enforces the property that, when successfully authenticating via public key, the last key passed to ServerConfig.PublicKeyCallback will be the key used to authenticate the connection. PublicKeyCallback will now be called multiple times with the same key, if necessary. Note that the client may still not control the last key passed to PublicKeyCallback if the connection is then authenticated with a different method, such as PasswordCallback, KeyboardInteractiveCallback, or NoClientAuth. Users should be using the Extensions field of the Permissions return value from the various authentication callbacks to record data associated with the authentication attempt instead of referencing external state. Once the connection is established the state corresponding to the successful authentication attempt can be retrieved via the ServerConn.Permissions field. Note that some third-party libraries misuse the Permissions type by sharing it across authentication attempts; users of third-party libraries should refer to the relevant projects for guidance. | ||||
| CVE-2025-49177 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2026-04-15 | 6.1 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the XFIXES extension. The XFixesSetClientDisconnectMode handler does not validate the request length, allowing a client to read unintended memory from previous requests. | ||||
| CVE-2025-49178 | 1 Redhat | 7 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 4 more | 2026-04-15 | 5.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the X server's request handling. Non-zero 'bytes to ignore' in a client's request can cause the server to skip processing another client's request, potentially leading to a denial of service. | ||||
| CVE-2025-49175 | 1 Redhat | 7 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 4 more | 2026-04-15 | 6.1 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the X Rendering extension's handling of animated cursors. If a client provides no cursors, the server assumes at least one is present, leading to an out-of-bounds read and potential crash. | ||||
| CVE-2024-28127 | 1 Redhat | 6 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 3 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High |
| Improper input validation in UEFI firmware for some Intel(R) Processors may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. | ||||
| CVE-2024-36137 | 1 Redhat | 1 Enterprise Linux | 2026-04-15 | 3.9 Low |
| A vulnerability has been identified in Node.js, affecting users of the experimental permission model when the --allow-fs-write flag is used. Node.js Permission Model do not operate on file descriptors, however, operations such as fs.fchown or fs.fchmod can use a "read-only" file descriptor to change the owner and permissions of a file. | ||||
| CVE-2024-28047 | 1 Redhat | 1 Enterprise Linux | 2026-04-15 | 5.3 Medium |
| Improper input validation in UEFI firmware for some Intel(R) Processors may allow a privileged user to potentially enable information disclosure via local access. | ||||
| CVE-2025-14443 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift | 2026-04-15 | 6.4 Medium |
| A flaw was found in ose-openshift-apiserver. This vulnerability allows internal network enumeration, service discovery, limited information disclosure, and potential denial-of-service (DoS) through Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) due to missing IP address and network-range validation when processing user-supplied image references. | ||||
| CVE-2024-31083 | 1 Redhat | 6 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus, Rhel E4s and 3 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.8 High |
| A use-after-free vulnerability was found in the ProcRenderAddGlyphs() function of Xorg servers. This issue occurs when AllocateGlyph() is called to store new glyphs sent by the client to the X server, potentially resulting in multiple entries pointing to the same non-refcounted glyphs. Consequently, ProcRenderAddGlyphs() may free a glyph, leading to a use-after-free scenario when the same glyph pointer is subsequently accessed. This flaw allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code on the system by sending a specially crafted request. | ||||
| CVE-2024-1313 | 1 Redhat | 1 Enterprise Linux | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| It is possible for a user in a different organization from the owner of a snapshot to bypass authorization and delete a snapshot by issuing a DELETE request to /api/snapshots/<key> using its view key. This functionality is intended to only be available to individuals with the permission to write/edit to the snapshot in question, but due to a bug in the authorization logic, deletion requests issued by an unprivileged user in a different organization than the snapshot owner are treated as authorized. Grafana Labs would like to thank Ravid Mazon and Jay Chen of Palo Alto Research for discovering and disclosing this vulnerability. This issue affects Grafana: from 9.5.0 before 9.5.18, from 10.0.0 before 10.0.13, from 10.1.0 before 10.1.9, from 10.2.0 before 10.2.6, from 10.3.0 before 10.3.5. | ||||
| CVE-2025-14083 | 1 Redhat | 1 Build Keycloak | 2026-04-15 | 2.7 Low |
| A flaw was found in the Keycloak Admin REST API. This vulnerability allows the exposure of backend schema and rules, potentially leading to targeted attacks or privilege escalation via improper access control. | ||||
| CVE-2025-14025 | 1 Redhat | 1 Ansible Automation Platform | 2026-04-15 | 8.5 High |
| A flaw was found in Ansible Automation Platform (AAP). Read-only scoped OAuth2 API Tokens in AAP, are enforced at the Gateway level for Gateway-specific operations. However, this vulnerability allows read-only tokens to perform write operations on backend services (e.g., Controller, Hub, EDA). If this flaw were exploited, an attacker‘s capabilities would only be limited by role based access controls (RBAC). | ||||
| CVE-2025-13888 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift Gitops | 2026-04-15 | 9.1 Critical |
| A flaw was found in OpenShift GitOps. Namespace admins can create ArgoCD Custom Resources (CRs) that trick the system into granting them elevated permissions in other namespaces, including privileged namespaces. An authenticated attacker can then use these elevated permissions to create privileged workloads that run on master nodes, effectively giving them root access to the entire cluster. | ||||