Export limit exceeded: 16840 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (16840 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-117649 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 3.5 Low |
| The issue timeline API and the web issue page hid cross-reference events that point at issues the reader cannot access, but not "dependency added" and "dependency removed" events. When a readable issue had been linked as a dependency to an issue in a repository the reader cannot access, for example a private repository, any reader of the first issue, including anonymous users of a public repository, received the linked issue's current title, body, state, labels, poster and attachment names through the API, and its repository, number and title on the web page. Creating the link requires access to both issues; comments and attachment downloads of the linked issue stayed protected. Dependency events are now filtered with the same read permission check; a related exposure of unlinked attachment metadata through hidden dependency placeholders was already fixed in 28.2.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-119533 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 7.5 High |
| Repository and organization project boards listed the pull requests that reference each issue on the board without checking whether the viewer can read them. When a private pull request mentions an issue on a board the viewer can open, the board revealed the private repository's path and the pull request's number, title and state, to anonymous visitors in the case of a public board. The pull request body, diff and files were not exposed. Boards now skip linked pull requests in repositories where the viewer cannot read pull requests. | ||||
| CVE-2026-17039 | 1 Redhat | 4 Certificate System, Dogtag Certificate System, Enterprise Linux and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 3.1 Low |
| A flaw was found in pki-core. The certificate authority (CA) renewal request path does not perform the realm-based authorization check that the enrollment path performs, allowing an authenticated user entitled to one realm to cause a certificate belonging to a different realm to be renewed without that realm's authorization. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114535 | 1 Drupal | 1 Swiper Formatter | 2026-11-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Swiper formatter allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Swiper formatter versions: from 0.0.0 to 2.1.2, from 3.0.1 to 3.1.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114533 | 1 Drupal | 1 Ágora Transparency Theme | 2026-11-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Ágora Transparency Theme allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Ágora Transparency Theme versions: from 0.0.0 to 1.2.3. | ||||
| CVE-2026-118386 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| Workflows triggered by a pull request review were read from the commit named in the review's `commit_id`, while the fork restrictions were decided by the reviewed pull request, and the commit was not checked to belong to that pull request. A user with read access to a repository could place a commit of their own in it, through a fork pull request or an AGit push, and submit a review naming that commit on a pull request whose head branch is in the same repository. On instances with a runner serving the repository, the attacker's workflow then ran without approval, received the Actions secrets of the repository and its owner, and got a `GITEA_TOKEN` with write access to the repository. Review-triggered workflows now run on the pull request head. | ||||
| CVE-2026-116289 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 9.1 Critical |
| Gitea did not reject personal access tokens restricted to public resources (`public-only`) on the organization Actions runner registration-token endpoint, and the runner registered with the resulting token was not limited to public repositories. Holding only such a token with `write:organization` that belongs to an owner of a public organization, an attacker could register an organization-level runner and receive jobs of the organization's private repositories that have Actions enabled, including the workflow content, Actions secrets and variables, and a task token with access to the private repository. The issue widens what the restricted token can reach; it gives nothing beyond what the owner's full account can already do. | ||||
| CVE-2026-117685 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 9.1 Critical |
| The OCI registry's cross-repository blob mount checked the target package against the token's `public-only` restriction, but checked the source blob only against the full account permissions of the token owner. A `public-only` token with `write:package` scope, whose owner can read a private package and write to a public package namespace, could mount a blob of the private package into the public package. The private blob, such as a container layer, could then be downloaded by anyone through the public package. | ||||
| CVE-2026-119441 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 7.5 High |
| `DELETE /api/v1/orgs/{org}/repos` deletes all repositories of an organization, but it did not enforce the public-only restriction of access tokens: the route only checked that the organization itself was public. A public-only token of an owner of a public organization could therefore permanently delete the organization's private repositories, which such a token must not reach. Routes that require organization ownership now reject public-only tokens. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107623 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 4.3 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the OIDC Dynamic Client Registration (DCR) component of Keycloak. A bug in the response serialization causes the backchannel logout offline token revocation setting to be omitted from responses. When a client performs a standard update, this missing information causes the setting to be silently disabled. As a result, offline tokens may remain valid even after a user session is terminated via backchannel logout. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94000 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.6 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Admin REST API of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs in the group-membership endpoints where the system fails to check if a group grants administrative privileges before allowing a user to be added. This allows a delegated administrator with limited permissions to add themselves to a high-privilege group, potentially gaining full control over the entire realm. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93999 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 4.2 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the OIDC protocol implementation of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs during the token refresh process when the server restores requested audiences from stored client IDs. Keycloak fails to verify if the target audience client is still enabled before issuing a new access token. This allows an application with an existing refresh token to continue obtaining valid access tokens for a disabled client, potentially bypassing administrative access controls for resource servers that rely on offline JWT validation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18208 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid and 5 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the OIDC token introspection endpoint of the keycloak-services component. Keycloak is an open-source identity and access management solution used to secure modern applications and services. The issue occurs when a confidential client, configured to receive signed JWT introspection responses, attempts to introspect a token issued for a different audience. Although the endpoint correctly identifies the token as inactive for that client, it still returns the full set of token claims within a signed JWT field. This allows an unauthorized client to bypass audience-based restrictions and access sensitive information contained in the token. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18203 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid and 5 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the group policy evaluation logic of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. When a group policy is set to extend permissions to child groups, the system incorrectly uses a simple text-based prefix check to verify group membership. This allows a user who belongs to a different group with a similar starting name to bypass security checks and gain unauthorized access to administrative functions or protected resources. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114553 | 1 Drupal | 1 Frontend Editing | 2026-11-06 | 5.4 Medium |
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Frontend Editing allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Frontend Editing versions: from 0.0.0 to 1.9.3. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114530 | 1 Drupal | 1 Dopup | 2026-11-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Dopup allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Dopup versions: from 0.0.0 to 1.0.7. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107255 | 1 Drupal | 1 Restrict Route By Ip | 2026-11-06 | 7.3 High |
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Restrict route by IP allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Restrict route by IP versions: from 0.0.0 to 1.3.1, from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107266 | 1 Drupal | 1 Views Share | 2026-11-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Drupal Views Share allows Forceful Browsing. This issue affects Views Share versions: from 0.0.0 to 2.0.1. | ||||
| CVE-2026-112887 | 1 Gitea | 1 Gitea | 2026-11-06 | 4.3 Medium |
| Gitea Actions task tokens authenticate to the REST API as a shared system user with a negative ID, which repository, organization, project and key filters treated as having no owner restriction, and the token carried no API scope to restrict user-scoped routes. A user who can run a workflow could use the job's token with `GET /api/v1/user/repos` to list every repository on the instance, including private repositories of other users and organizations, with their metadata. Repository contents remained protected by per-repository permission checks. System users now own nothing, and `/api/v1/user` routes other than `GET /api/v1/user` accept only individual and bot accounts. | ||||
| CVE-2026-19610 | 1 Redhat | 5 Jboss Enterprise Application Platform, Jboss Enterprise Application Platform Expansion Pack, Jbosseapxp and 2 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the platform-mbean component of JBoss EAP, which provides management access to JVM-level metrics and configurations. The issue occurs because the handler for the read-resource operation on the runtime management resource fails to perform required Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) checks. This allows an authenticated user with low-privileged access, such as the Monitor role, to view sensitive system properties and JVM configuration details that should be restricted. | ||||