Export limit exceeded: 366768 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 366768 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 366768 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (366768 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-41223 | 2026-04-15 | 4.8 Medium | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM i800 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i801 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i802 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i803 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M2100 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M2200 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M969 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC30 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RP110 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600F (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600T (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS400 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS401 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416P (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS8000 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000A (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000H (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000T (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900GP (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-C01 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-XX (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-C01 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-XX (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS920L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS920W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS930L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS930W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS940G (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS969 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2200 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG907R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG908C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG909R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG910C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSL910 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228P (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916P (All versions < V5.10.0). The affected devices support the TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 cipher suite, which uses CBC (Cipher Block Chaining) mode that is known to be vulnerable to timing attacks. This could allow an attacker to compromise the integrity and confidentiality of encrypted communications. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41224 | 2026-04-15 | 8.8 High | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RMC8388NC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416NCv2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416PNCv2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900GNC(32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900NC(32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100NC(32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100PNC (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288NC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300NC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300PNC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488NC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG907R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG908C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG909R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG910C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG920PNC V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSL910 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSL910NC (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228P (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916P (All versions < V5.10.0). The affected products do not properly enforce interface access restrictions when changing from management to non-management interface configurations until a system reboot occurs, despite configuration being saved. This could allow an attacker with network access and credentials to gain access to device through non-management and maintain SSH access to the device until reboot. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41235 | 2026-04-15 | 8.6 High | ||
| Spring Cloud Gateway Server forwards the X-Forwarded-For and Forwarded headers from untrusted proxies. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41233 | 2026-04-15 | 6.8 Medium | ||
| Description: VMware AVI Load Balancer contains an authenticated blind SQL Injection vulnerability. VMware has evaluated the severity of the issue to be in the Moderate severity range https://www.broadcom.com/support/vmware-services/security-response with a maximum CVSSv3 base score of 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N . Known Attack Vectors: An authenticated malicious user with network access may be able to use specially crafted SQL queries to gain database access. Resolution: To remediate CVE-2025-41233 apply the patches to the Avi Controller listed in the 'Fixed Version' column of the 'Response Matrix' found below. Workarounds: None. Additional Documentation: None. Acknowledgements: VMware would like to thank Alexandru Copaceanu https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandru-copaceanu-b39aaa1a8/ for reporting this issue to us. Notes: None. Response Matrix: ProductVersionRunning OnCVECVSSv4SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional DocumentsVMware Avi Load Balancer30.1.1AnyCVE-2025-41233 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N Moderate 30.1.2-2p3 https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-security-load-balancing/avi-load-balancer/avi-load-balancer/30-1/vmware-avi-load-balancer-release-notes/release-notes-30-1-2.html NoneNoneVMware Avi Load Balancer30.1.2AnyCVE-2025-41233 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N Moderate 30.1.2-2p3 https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-security-load-balancing/avi-load-balancer/avi-load-balancer/30-1/vmware-avi-load-balancer-release-notes/release-notes-30-1-2.html NoneNoneVMware Avi Load Balancer30.2.1AnyCVE-2025-41233 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N Moderate 30.2.1-2p6 https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-security-load-balancing/avi-load-balancer/avi-load-balancer/30-2/vmware-avi-load-balancer-release-notes/release-notes-for-avi-load-balancer-version-30-2-1.html NoneNoneVMware Avi Load Balancer30.2.2AnyCVE-2025-41233 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N Moderate 30.2.2-2p5 https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-security-load-balancing/avi-load-balancer/avi-load-balancer/30-2/vmware-avi-load-balancer-release-notes/release-notes-for-avi-load-balancer-version-30-2-2.html NoneNoneVMware Avi Load Balancer30.2.3AnyCVE-2025-41233N/AN/AUnaffectedNoneNoneVMware Avi Load Balancer31.1.1AnyCVE-2025-41233 6.8 https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3-0#CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N Moderate 31.1.1-2p2 https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-security-load-balancing/avi-load-balancer/avi-load-balancer/31-1/vmware-avi-load-balancer-release-notes/Release-Note-Section-20627.html NoneNone CWE-89 in the Avi Load Balancer component of VMware allows an authenticated attacker to execute blind SQL injections in versions 30.1.1, 30.1.2, 30.2.1, and 30.2.2 due to improper input validation, enabling unauthorized database access. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41234 | 1 Vmware | 1 Spring Framework | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| Description In Spring Framework, versions 6.0.x as of 6.0.5, versions 6.1.x and 6.2.x, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a “Content-Disposition” header with a non-ASCII charset, where the filename attribute is derived from user-supplied input. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all the following are true: * The header is prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition. * The filename is set via ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset). * The value for the filename is derived from user-supplied input. * The application does not sanitize the user-supplied input. * The downloaded content of the response is injected with malicious commands by the attacker (see RFD paper reference for details). An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true: * The application does not set a “Content-Disposition” response header. * The header is not prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition. * The filename is set via one of: * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String), or * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, ASCII) * The filename is not derived from user-supplied input. * The filename is derived from user-supplied input but sanitized by the application. * The attacker cannot inject malicious content in the downloaded content of the response. Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework: * 6.2.0 - 6.2.7 * 6.1.0 - 6.1.20 * 6.0.5 - 6.0.28 * Older, unsupported versions are not affected MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version. Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.8OSS6.1.x6.1.21OSS6.0.x6.0.29 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary. CWE-113 in `Content-Disposition` handling in VMware Spring Framework versions 6.0.5 to 6.2.7 allows remote attackers to launch Reflected File Download (RFD) attacks via unsanitized user input in `ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset)` with non-ASCII charsets. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41239 | 1 Vmware | 4 Esxi, Fusion, Tools and 1 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.1 High |
| VMware ESXi, Workstation, Fusion, and VMware Tools contains an information disclosure vulnerability due to the usage of an uninitialised memory in vSockets. A malicious actor with local administrative privileges on a virtual machine may be able to exploit this issue to leak memory from processes communicating with vSockets. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41240 | 2026-04-15 | 10 Critical | ||
| Three Bitnami Helm charts mount Kubernetes Secrets under a predictable path (/opt/bitnami/*/secrets) that is located within the web server document root. In affected versions, this can lead to unauthenticated access to sensitive credentials via HTTP/S. A remote attacker could retrieve these secrets by accessing specific URLs if the application is exposed externally. The issue affects deployments using the default value of usePasswordFiles=true, which mounts secrets as files into the container filesystem. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41241 | 1 Vmware | 4 Cloud Foundation, Telco Cloud Infrastructure, Telco Cloud Platform and 1 more | 2026-04-15 | 4.4 Medium |
| VMware vCenter contains a denial-of-service vulnerability. A malicious actor who is authenticated through vCenter and has permission to perform API calls for guest OS customisation may trigger this vulnerability to create a denial-of-service condition. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41242 | 1 Vmware | 1 Spring Framework | 2026-04-15 | 5.9 Medium |
| Spring Framework MVC applications can be vulnerable to a “Path Traversal Vulnerability” when deployed on a non-compliant Servlet container. An application can be vulnerable when all the following are true: * the application is deployed as a WAR or with an embedded Servlet container * the Servlet container does not reject suspicious sequences https://jakarta.ee/specifications/servlet/6.1/jakarta-servlet-spec-6.1.html#uri-path-canonicalization * the application serves static resources https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc/mvc-config/static-resources.html#page-title with Spring resource handling We have verified that applications deployed on Apache Tomcat or Eclipse Jetty are not vulnerable, as long as default security features are not disabled in the configuration. Because we cannot check exploits against all Servlet containers and configuration variants, we strongly recommend upgrading your application. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41246 | 2 Microsoft, Vmware | 2 Windows, Tools | 2026-04-15 | 7.6 High |
| VMware Tools for Windows contains an improper authorisation vulnerability due to the way it handles user access controls. A malicious actor with non-administrative privileges on a guest VM, who is already authenticated through vCenter or ESX may exploit this issue to access other guest VMs. Successful exploitation requires knowledge of credentials of the targeted VMs and vCenter or ESX. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41243 | 1 Spring | 2 Spring, Webflux | 2026-04-15 | 10 Critical |
| Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux may be vulnerable to Spring Environment property modification. An application should be considered vulnerable when all the following are true: * The application is using Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux (Spring Cloud Gateway Server WebMVC is not vulnerable). * Spring Boot actuator is a dependency. * The Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux actuator web endpoint is enabled via management.endpoints.web.exposure.include=gateway. * The actuator endpoints are available to attackers. * The actuator endpoints are unsecured. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41253 | 2 Spring, Vmware | 4 Spring, Webflux, Spring and 1 more | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High |
| The following versions of Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux may be vulnerable to the ability to expose environment variables and system properties to attackers. An application should be considered vulnerable when all the following are true: * The application is using Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux (Spring Cloud Gateway Server WebMVC is not vulnerable). * An admin or untrusted third party using Spring Expression Language (SpEL) to access environment variables or system properties via routes. * An untrusted third party could create a route that uses SpEL to access environment variables or system properties if: * The Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux actuator web endpoint is enabled via management.endpoints.web.exposure.include=gateway and management.endpoint.gateway.enabled=trueor management.endpoint.gateway.access=unrestricte. * The actuator endpoints are available to attackers. * The actuator endpoints are unsecured. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41254 | 1 Vmware | 1 Spring Framework | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium |
| STOMP over WebSocket applications may be vulnerable to a security bypass that allows an attacker to send unauthorized messages. Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework: * 6.2.0 - 6.2.11 * 6.1.0 - 6.1.23 * 6.0.x - 6.0.29 * 5.3.0 - 5.3.45 * Older, unsupported versions are also affected. MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version. Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.12OSS6.1.x6.1.24 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ 6.0.xN/A Out of support https://spring.io/projects/spring-framework#support 5.3.x5.3.46 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary. CreditThis vulnerability was discovered and responsibly reported by Jannis Kaiser. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41255 | 2026-04-15 | 8 High | ||
| Cyberduck and Mountain Duck improperly handle TLS certificate pinning for untrusted certificates (e.g., self-signed), unnecessarily installing it to the Windows Certificate Store of the current user without any restrictions. This issue affects Cyberduck through 9.1.6 and Mountain Duck through 4.17.5. | ||||
| CVE-2025-41256 | 2026-04-15 | 7.4 High | ||
| Cyberduck and Mountain Duck improper handle TLS certificate pinning for untrusted certificates (e.g., self-signed), since the certificate fingerprint is stored as SHA-1, although SHA-1 is considered weak. This issue affects Cyberduck: through 9.1.6; Mountain Duck: through 4.17.5. | ||||
| CVE-2025-3751 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| The component listed above contains a vulnerability that can be exploited by an attacker to perform a SQL Injection attack. This could lead to unauthorised access to the database and exposure of sensitive information | ||||
| CVE-2025-54064 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| Rucio is a software framework that provides functionality to organize, manage, and access large volumes of scientific data using customizable policies. The common Rucio helm-charts for the `rucio-server`, `rucio-ui`, and `rucio-webui` define the log format for the apache access log of these components. The `X-Rucio-Auth-Token`, which is part of each request header sent to Rucio, is part of this log format. Thus, each access log line potentially exposes the credentials (Internal Rucio token, or JWT in case of OIDC authentication) of the user. Due to the length of the token (Especially for a JWT) the tokens are often truncated, and thus not usable as credential; nevertheless, the (partial) credential should not be part of the logfile. The impact of this issue is amplified if the access logs are made available to a larger group of people than the instance administrators themselves. An updated release has been supplied for the `rucio-server`, `rucio-ui` and `rucio-webui` helm-chart. The change was also retrofitted for the currently supported Rucio LTS releases. The patched versions are rucio-server 37.0.2, 35.0.1, and 32.0.1; rucio-ui 37.0.4, 35.0.1, and 32.0.2; and rucio-webui 37.0.2, 35.1.1, and 32.0.1. As a workaround, one may update the `logFormat` variable and remove the `X-Rucio-Auth-Token`. | ||||
| CVE-2025-62034 | 1 Wordpress | 1 Wordpress | 2026-04-15 | 8.8 High |
| Incorrect Privilege Assignment vulnerability in uxper Togo togo.This issue affects Togo: from n/a through < 1.0.4. | ||||
| CVE-2025-54070 | 1 Openzeppelin | 1 Openzeppelin Contracts | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| OpenZeppelin Contracts is a library for secure smart contract development. Starting in version 5.2.0 and prior to version 5.4.0, the `lastIndexOf(bytes,byte,uint256)` function of the `Bytes.sol` library may access uninitialized memory when the following two conditions hold: 1) the provided buffer length is empty (i.e. `buffer.length == 0`) and position is not `2**256 - 1` (i.e. `pos != type(uint256).max`). The `pos` argument could be used to access arbitrary data outside of the buffer bounds. This could lead to the operation running out of gas, or returning an invalid index (outside of the empty buffer). Processing this invalid result for accessing the `buffer` would cause a revert under normal conditions. When triggered, the function reads memory at offset `buffer + 0x20 + pos`. If memory at that location (outside the `buffer`) matches the search pattern, the function would return an out of bound index instead of the expected `type(uint256).max`. This creates unexpected behavior where callers receive a valid-looking index pointing outside buffer bounds. Subsequent memory accesses that don't check bounds and use the returned index must carefully review the potential impact depending on their setup. Code relying on this function returning `type(uint256).max` for empty buffers or using the returned index without bounds checking could exhibit undefined behavior. Users should upgrade to version 5.4.0 to receive a patch. | ||||
| CVE-2025-54082 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| marshmallow-packages/nova-tiptap is a rich text editor for Laravel Nova based on tiptap. Prior to 5.7.0, a vulnerability was discovered in the marshmallow-packages/nova-tiptap Laravel Nova package that allows unauthenticated users to upload arbitrary files to any Laravel disk configured in the application. The vulnerability is due to missing authentication middleware (Nova and Nova.Auth) on the /nova-tiptap/api/file upload endpoint, the lack of validation on uploaded files (no MIME/type or extension restrictions), and the ability for an attacker to choose the disk parameter dynamically. This means an attacker can craft a custom form and send a POST request to /nova-tiptap/api/file, supplying a valid CSRF token, and upload executable or malicious files (e.g., .php, binaries) to public disks such as local, public, or s3. If a publicly accessible storage path is used (e.g. S3 with public access, or Laravel’s public disk), the attacker may gain the ability to execute or distribute arbitrary files — amounting to a potential Remote Code Execution (RCE) vector in some environments. This vulnerability was fixed in 5.7.0. | ||||