Export limit exceeded: 424706 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 424706 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (2004 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-38867 | 2026-04-15 | 5.9 Medium | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIPROTEC 5 6MD84 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD89 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SX82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SX85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UM85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BD-2FO (All versions < V9.62), SIPROTEC 5 Compact 7SX800 (CP050) (All versions < V9.64). The affected devices are supporting weak ciphers on several ports (443/tcp for web, 4443/tcp for DIGSI 5 and configurable port for syslog over TLS). This could allow an unauthorized attacker in a man-in-the-middle position to decrypt any data passed over to and from those ports. | ||||
| CVE-2025-46582 | 1 Zte | 1 Zxmp M721 | 2026-04-15 | 7.7 High |
| A private key disclosure vulnerability exists in ZTE's ZXMP M721 product. A low-privileged user can bypass authorization checks to view the device's communication private key, resulting in key exposure and impacting communication security. | ||||
| CVE-2024-47256 | 2026-04-15 | 6 Medium | ||
| Successful exploitation of this vulnerability could allow an attacker (who needs to have Admin access privileges) to read hardcoded AES passphrase, which may be used for decryption of certain data within backup files of 2N Access Commander version 1.14 and older. 2N has released an updated version 3.3 of 2N Access Commander, where this vulnerability is mitigated. It is recommended that all customers update 2N Access Commander to the latest version. | ||||
| CVE-2025-45767 | 2026-04-15 | 7 High | ||
| jose v6.0.10 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: this is disputed by a third party because the claim of "do not meet recommended security standards" does not reflect guidance in a final publication. | ||||
| CVE-2025-45765 | 2026-04-15 | 9.1 Critical | ||
| ruby-jwt v3.0.0.beta1 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: the Supplier's perspective is "keysize is not something that is enforced by this library. Currently more recent versions of OpenSSL are enforcing some key sizes and those restrictions apply to the users of this gem also." | ||||
| CVE-2025-45764 | 2026-04-15 | 3.2 Low | ||
| jsrsasign v11.1.0 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: this issue has been disputed by a third party who believes that CVE IDs can be assigned for key lengths in specific applications that use a library, and should not be assigned to the default key lengths in a library. This dispute is subject to review under CNA rules 4.1.4, 4.1.14, and other rules; the dispute tagging is not meant to recommend an outcome for this CVE Record. | ||||
| CVE-2024-47921 | 2026-04-15 | 8.4 High | ||
| Smadar SPS – CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm | ||||
| CVE-2024-48924 | 1 Messagepack | 1 Messagepack-csharp | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| ### Impact When this library is used to deserialize messagepack data from an untrusted source, there is a risk of a denial of service attack by an attacker that sends data contrived to produce hash collisions, leading to large CPU consumption disproportionate to the size of the data being deserialized. This is similar to [a prior advisory](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/security/advisories/GHSA-7q36-4xx7-xcxf), which provided an inadequate fix for the hash collision part of the vulnerability. ### Patches The following steps are required to mitigate this risk. 1. Upgrade to a version of the library where a fix is available. 1. Review the steps in [this previous advisory](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/security/advisories/GHSA-7q36-4xx7-xcxf) to ensure you have your application configured for untrusted data. ### Workarounds If upgrading MessagePack to a patched version is not an option for you, you may apply a manual workaround as follows: 1. Declare a class that derives from `MessagePackSecurity`. 2. Override the `GetHashCollisionResistantEqualityComparer<T>` method to provide a collision-resistant hash function of your own and avoid calling `base.GetHashCollisionResistantEqualityComparer<T>()`. 3. Configure a `MessagePackSerializerOptions` with an instance of your derived type by calling `WithSecurity` on an existing options object. 4. Use your custom options object for all deserialization operations. This may be by setting the `MessagePackSerializer.DefaultOptions` static property, if you call methods that rely on this default property, and/or by passing in the options object explicitly to any `Deserialize` method. ### References - Learn more about best security practices when reading untrusted data with [MessagePack 1.x](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/tree/v1.x#security) or [MessagePack 2.x](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp#security). - The .NET team's [discussion on hash collision vulnerabilities of their `HashCode` struct](https://github.com/GrabYourPitchforks/runtime/blob/threat_models/docs/design/security/System.HashCode.md). ### For more information If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * [Start a public discussion](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/discussions) * [Email us privately](mailto:andrewarnott@live.com) | ||||
| CVE-2024-52614 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| Use of hard-coded cryptographic key issue exists in "Kura Sushi Official App Produced by EPARK" for Android versions prior to 3.8.5. If this vulnerability is exploited, a local attacker may obtain the login ID and password for the affected product. | ||||
| CVE-2024-52801 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| sftpgo is a full-featured and highly configurable event-driven file transfer solution. Server protocols: SFTP, HTTP/S, FTP/S, WebDAV. The OpenID Connect implementation allows authenticated users to brute force session cookies and thereby gain access to other users' data, since the cookies are generated predictably using the xid library and are therefore unique but not cryptographically secure. This issue was fixed in version v2.6.4, where cookies are opaque and cryptographically secure strings. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability. | ||||
| 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-2025-41223 | 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-2025-37127 | 2 Arubanetworks, Hp | 2 Edgeconnect Enterprise, Arubaos | 2026-04-15 | 7.2 High |
| A vulnerability in the cryptographic logic used by HPE Aruba Networking EdgeConnect SD-WAN Gateways could allow an authenticated remote attacker to gain shell access. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying operating system, potentially leading to unauthorized access and control over the affected systems. | ||||
| CVE-2024-54089 | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in APOGEE PXC Series (BACnet) (All versions), APOGEE PXC Series (P2 Ethernet) (All versions), TALON TC Series (BACnet) (All versions). Affected devices contain a weak encryption mechanism based on a hard-coded key. This could allow an attacker to guess or decrypt the password from the cyphertext. | ||||
| CVE-2024-54143 | 1 Openwrt | 1 Asu | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| openwrt/asu is an image on demand server for OpenWrt based distributions. The request hashing mechanism truncates SHA-256 hashes to only 12 characters. This significantly reduces entropy, making it feasible for an attacker to generate collisions. By exploiting this, a previously built malicious image can be served in place of a legitimate one, allowing the attacker to "poison" the artifact cache and deliver compromised images to unsuspecting users. This can be combined with other attacks, such as a command injection in Imagebuilder that allows malicious users to inject arbitrary commands into the build process, resulting in the production of malicious firmware images signed with the legitimate build key. This has been patched with 920c8a1. | ||||
| CVE-2025-0508 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| A vulnerability in the SageMaker Workflow component of aws/sagemaker-python-sdk allows for the possibility of MD5 hash collisions in all versions. This can lead to workflows being inadvertently replaced due to the reuse of results from different configurations that produce the same MD5 hash. This issue can cause integrity problems within the pipeline, potentially leading to erroneous processing outcomes. | ||||
| CVE-2025-10080 | 2026-04-15 | 3.1 Low | ||
| A vulnerability has been found in running-elephant Datart up to 1.0.0-rc3. Affected by this issue is the function getTokensecret of the file datart/security/src/main/java/datart/security/util/AESUtil.java of the component API. The manipulation leads to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. | ||||
| CVE-2025-13877 | 1 Nocobase | 1 Jwt Service | 2026-04-15 | 5.6 Medium |
| A vulnerability was detected in nocobase up to 1.9.4/2.0.0-alpha.37. The affected element is an unknown function of the file nocobase\packages\core\auth\src\base\jwt-service.ts of the component JWT Service. The manipulation of the argument API_KEY results in use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The attack can be launched remotely. A high complexity level is associated with this attack. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. | ||||
| CVE-2025-31130 | 2026-04-15 | 6.8 Medium | ||
| gitoxide is an implementation of git written in Rust. Before 0.42.0, gitoxide uses SHA-1 hash implementations without any collision detection, leaving it vulnerable to hash collision attacks. gitoxide uses the sha1_smol or sha1 crate, both of which implement standard SHA-1 without any mitigations for collision attacks. This means that two distinct Git objects with colliding SHA-1 hashes would break the Git object model and integrity checks when used with gitoxide. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.42.0. | ||||
| CVE-2025-13948 | 1 Opsre | 1 Go-ldap-admin | 2026-04-15 | 5.6 Medium |
| A vulnerability was determined in opsre go-ldap-admin up to 20251011. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file docs/docker-compose/docker-compose.yaml of the component JWT Handler. Executing manipulation of the argument secret key can lead to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The attack can be launched remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is assessed as difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. | ||||