Export limit exceeded: 33413 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (33413 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-55997 | 1 Rancher | 1 Rancher | 2026-08-06 | 8.8 High |
| Rancher issues long-lived registration tokens to authenticate nodes and agents joining a downstream cluster. These tokens were stored and exposed in plaintext with no expiration, so a malicious user could obtain one either through the Rancher API, etcd, stored automation, or direct file access on a node, and could use it at any time to register a rogue node into the cluster. | ||||
| CVE-2026-15991 | 2026-08-06 | 8.8 High | ||
| The File Manager plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the connector function in all versions from 6.0 - 6.9. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to read and delete arbitrary files on the server, which can lead to remote code execution when the right file is deleted (such as wp-config.php). The bypass is triggered by passing cmd=rm or cmf=file in the URL query string of a POST request: elFinder's bind registration reads the command exclusively from $_POST and therefore never registers the rm.pre permission handler, while the dispatcher reads from the merged $_GET+$_POST superglobal and executes the rm or file command unchecked against a volume that defaults to ABSPATH. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70446 | 2026-08-06 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Missing permission checks in Jenkins CodeSonar Plugin 3.6.0 and earlier allow attackers with Overall/Read permission to enumerate credentials IDs of credentials stored in Jenkins. | ||||
| CVE-2026-24076 | 1 Qualcomm | 1 Snapdragon | 2026-08-06 | 6.7 Medium |
| Memory Corruption when processing registry values with incorrect types using a direct query method. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18974 | 1 Heshengtao | 1 Super-agent-party | 2026-08-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| A vulnerability was found in heshengtao super-agent-party up to 0.4.1. This affects the function get_file_content of the file server.py of the component execute_tool_manually Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument tool_name/tool_params results in information disclosure. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. | ||||
| CVE-2026-67531 | 1 Agentfront | 1 Frontmcp | 2026-08-06 | N/A |
| FrontMCP is a TypeScript-first framework for the Model Context Protocol (MCP). Prior to 1.5.7, the sandboxed codecall:execute tool exposes live host Zod schema instances to the script via getTool(), and because Zod v4 defines _zod as a non-configurable, non-writable own property, the ECMAScript Proxy invariants force the security membrane to hand back the raw host object, letting a script reach _zod.constr.constructor (the host Function constructor) and execute arbitrary code in the server process. A single tools/call is sufficient to escape the sandbox and achieve remote code execution as the server user, exposing everything the process holds such as OAuth client secrets, JWT_SECRET, session keys, database credentials, and cloud instance metadata. Because the framework's DEFAULT_AUTH_OPTIONS is public mode, an unconfigured server serves this to unauthenticated callers, and on authenticated servers an indirect prompt injection in tool output or fetched content can trigger it without a human attackerThis issue is fixed in version 1.5.7. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54389 | 2026-08-06 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70442 | 2026-08-06 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Jenkins Google Chat Notification Plugin 166.ve6b_de280f2e8 and earlier does not set the appropriate context for credentials lookup, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to access and capture credentials they are not entitled to use. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54388 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54387 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54386 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54385 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54384 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54383 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; never assigned. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54382 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54381 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54380 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54379 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54378 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||
| CVE-2023-54377 | 2026-08-05 | N/A | ||
| Erroneously reserved under wrong year by automation defect; superseded by correct-year CVE. | ||||