Export limit exceeded: 346095 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (346095 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-13934 | 2 Themeum, Wordpress | 2 Tutor Lms, Wordpress | 2026-04-22 | 4.3 Medium |
| The Tutor LMS – eLearning and online course solution plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized course enrollment in all versions up to, and including, 3.9.3. This is due to a missing capability check and purchasability validation in the `course_enrollment()` AJAX handler. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber level access and above, to enroll themselves in any course without going through the proper purchase flow. | ||||
| CVE-2025-15378 | 1 Wordpress | 1 Wordpress | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| The AJS Footnotes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'note_list_class' and 'popup_display_effect_in' parameters in all versions up to, and including, 1.0 due to missing authorization and nonce verification on settings save, as well as insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update plugin settings and inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24061 | 2 Debian, Gnu | 2 Debian Linux, Inetutils | 2026-04-22 | 9.8 Critical |
| telnetd in GNU Inetutils through 2.7 allows remote authentication bypass via a "-f root" value for the USER environment variable. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24858 | 1 Fortinet | 5 Fortianalyzer, Fortimanager, Fortios and 2 more | 2026-04-22 | 9.4 Critical |
| An Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel vulnerability [CWE-288] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiAnalyzer 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiAnalyzer 7.4.0 through 7.4.9, FortiAnalyzer 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiAnalyzer 7.0.0 through 7.0.15, FortiManager 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiManager 7.4.0 through 7.4.9, FortiManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.15, FortiOS 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.2.12, FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.18, FortiProxy 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.12, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.15, FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.22, FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.3, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.11 may allow an attacker with a FortiCloud account and a registered device to log into other devices registered to other accounts, if FortiCloud SSO authentication is enabled on those devices. | ||||
| CVE-2026-26951 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 6.7 Medium |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.6, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.20, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.60 contain a stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-22761 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 6.7 Medium |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 8.5 through 8.6 contain a command injection vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-26942 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 6.7 Medium |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 8.5 through 8.6 contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS command injection vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-26943 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.6, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.20, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.60 contain an OS command injection vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24506 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.6, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.20, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.60 contain an OS command injection vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution as root. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24505 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 8.5 through 8.6 contain an improper input validation vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24504 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.6, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.20, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.60 contain an improper input validation vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-23774 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 7.2 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain with Data Domain Operating System (DD OS) of Feature Release versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.5, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.10, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.40, contain an OS command injection vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution. | ||||
| CVE-2026-26944 | 1 Dell | 1 Powerprotect Data Domain | 2026-04-22 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.6, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0 through 8.3.1.20, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.60 contain a missing authentication for critical function vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges. Exploitation requires an authenticated user to perform a specific action. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5479 | 1 Wolfssl | 1 Wolfssl | 2026-04-22 | N/A |
| In wolfSSL's EVP layer, the ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD decryption path in wolfSSL_EVP_CipherFinal (and related EVP cipher finalization functions) fails to verify the authentication tag before returning plaintext to the caller. When an application uses the EVP API to perform ChaCha20-Poly1305 decryption, the implementation computes or accepts the tag but does not compare it against the expected value. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5466 | 1 Wolfssl | 1 Wolfssl | 2026-04-22 | N/A |
| wolfSSL's ECCSI signature verifier `wc_VerifyEccsiHash` decodes the `r` and `s` scalars from the signature blob via `mp_read_unsigned_bin` with no check that they lie in `[1, q-1]`. A crafted forged signature could verify against any message for any identity, using only publicly-known constants. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5194 | 1 Wolfssl | 1 Wolfssl | 2026-04-22 | 9.1 Critical |
| Missing hash/digest size and OID checks allow digests smaller than allowed when verifying ECDSA certificates, or smaller than is appropriate for the relevant key type, to be accepted by signature verification functions. This could lead to reduced security of ECDSA certificate-based authentication if the public CA key used is also known. This affects ECDSA/ECC verification when EdDSA or ML-DSA is also enabled. | ||||
| CVE-2026-40321 | 1 Dnnsoftware | 1 Dnn Platform | 2026-04-22 | 8.1 High |
| DNN (formerly DotNetNuke) is an open-source web content management platform (CMS) in the Microsoft ecosystem. Prior to version 10.2.2, a user could upload a specially crafted SVG file that could include scripts that can target both authenticated and unauthenticated DNN users. The impact is increased if the scripts are run by a power user. Version 10.2.2 patches the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-40478 | 1 Thymeleaf | 3 Org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf-spring5, Org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf-spring6, Thymeleaf | 2026-04-22 | 9.1 Critical |
| Thymeleaf is a server-side Java template engine for web and standalone environments. Versions 3.1.3.RELEASE and prior contain a security bypass vulnerability in the the expression execution mechanisms. Although the library provides mechanisms to prevent expression injection, it fails to properly neutralize specific syntax patterns that allow for the execution of unauthorized expressions. If an application developer passes unvalidated user input directly to the template engine, an unauthenticated remote attacker can bypass the library's protections to achieve Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI). This issue has ben fixed in version 3.1.4.RELEASE. | ||||
| CVE-2026-40477 | 1 Thymeleaf | 3 Org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf-spring5, Org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf-spring6, Thymeleaf | 2026-04-22 | 9.1 Critical |
| Thymeleaf is a server-side Java template engine for web and standalone environments. Versions 3.1.3.RELEASE and prior contain a security bypass vulnerability in the expression execution mechanisms. Although the library provides mechanisms to prevent expression injection, it fails to properly restrict the scope of accessible objects, allowing specific potentially sensitive objects to be reached from within a template. If an application developer passes unvalidated user input directly to the template engine, an unauthenticated remote attacker can bypass the library's protections to achieve Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI). This issue has ben fixed in version 3.1.4.RELEASE. | ||||
| CVE-2026-30898 | 1 Apache | 1 Airflow | 2026-04-22 | 8.8 High |
| An example of BashOperator in Airflow documentation suggested a way of passing dag_run.conf in the way that could cause unsanitized user input to be used to escalate privileges of UI user to allow execute code on worker. Users should review if any of their own DAGs have adopted this incorrect advice. | ||||