Export limit exceeded: 400389 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (400389 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-103442 | 1 Wikimedia | 1 Mediawiki - Centralauth Extension | 2026-09-30 | N/A |
| External control of system or configuration setting vulnerability in The Wikimedia Foundation MediaWiki CentralAuth extension allows Code Injection. This issue affects MediaWiki CentralAuth extension: 1.46, 1.45, and 1.43. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102489 | 1 Zammad | 1 Zammad | 2026-09-30 | N/A |
| Zammad versions 6.3.0 to 6.5.4 are vulnerable a session hijack vulnerability that leads to remote code execution as the zammad user. The vulnerability is also present in version 7.0.0 to version 7.1.3, but not exploitable due to environment conditions. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102490 | 1 Zammad | 1 Zammad | 2026-09-30 | N/A |
| All versions of Zammad including the latest alpha enable the local zammad user to escalate privileges to root. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102127 | 2026-09-30 | 7 High | ||
| An XML parser used by Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not restrict external entity references. Where an optional, non-default message-processing feature is enabled, a remote and unauthenticated sender could potentially use a crafted message to read files accessible to the gateway service account, including cryptographic key material and credentials, and have them sent to a destination they control. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102128 | 2026-09-30 | 7.5 High | ||
| An identity-verification weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway allowed the gateway to act on the Kiteworks platform on behalf of a user it had not authenticated, and to provision a platform account for an identity it did not already know. A remote, unauthenticated sender could potentially exploit this to obtain control of a platform account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102130 | 2026-09-30 | 7.2 High | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not sufficiently validate the content of an uploaded backup, and allowed an administrator to influence how the application loaded it. An authenticated administrator could potentially use this to execute arbitrary code on the gateway as the underlying service account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102131 | 2026-09-30 | 7.2 High | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway rejected certain configuration settings, but its validation did not recognize every form in which they could be supplied. An authenticated administrator could potentially use an unrecognized form to have a file of their choosing written to the gateway and executed, resulting in code execution as the gateway service account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102102 | 2026-09-30 | 9.1 Critical | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). A server-side request forgery (SSRF) weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway could allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to induce the gateway to issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations. The requests are triggered while the gateway retrieves an issuer certificate in an inbound message. Depending on the services reachable from the gateway, this could disclose sensitive internal information or disrupt gateway operation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102135 | 2026-09-30 | 6.6 Medium | ||
| On a Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway cluster with database replication enabled, a party trusted by the cluster could submit a crafted serialized object that was deserialized without sufficient validation, potentially allowing code execution as the gateway service account. Replication is disabled by default, and exploitation requires control of a trusted cluster peer or administrative access to the appliance. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102139 | 2026-09-30 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| An authorization check in the large file exchange feature of Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not correctly establish that the requesting user was a party to the package being requested. An authenticated user of that optional feature could read the subject, message body, and attachments of packages they neither sent nor received. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102140 | 2026-09-30 | 4.9 Medium | ||
| An authenticated administrator could initiate an administrative import using a file whose contents were not fully verified, because the import validated only the file's header rather than the complete file. This could allow unverified or forged content to be accepted and processed, affecting the integrity of the imported data. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102143 | 2026-09-30 | 7.5 High | ||
| An unauthenticated attacker could cause a file with attacker-controlled content to be written to the appliance filesystem through an administrative upload handler that did not properly authenticate the request. This did not by itself result in code execution, which would require a separate vulnerability to place the file in an executable location. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102149 | 2026-09-30 | 9.4 Critical | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not sufficiently restrict which account a certificate could be assigned to. This could allow an attacker to associate a certificate with another user's account, affecting the confidentiality and integrity of that account's encrypted mail and, where certificate-based login is enabled, potentially permitting unauthorized access to the account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102146 | 2026-09-30 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| An authenticated Email Protection Gateway administrator holding only limited, delegated permissions could write files with attacker-controlled content to arbitrary locations accessible to the Email Protection Gateway service account. This exceeds the administrator's intended privileges and could be used to alter application files and configuration or to disrupt the availability of the service. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102097 | 2026-09-30 | 7.2 High | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution. Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway allowed an authenticated administrator to import configuration whose contents were not sufficiently validated before being processed. A crafted submission could potentially allow arbitrary commands to be executed on the affected gateway. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102095 | 2026-09-30 | 9.1 Critical | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery. Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway performed server-side fetches of URLs contained in the message content it processed, without adequately restricting the fetch destination. A remote, unauthenticated sender could craft a message that caused the gateway to issue requests to internal services and cloud instance metadata endpoints and return the responses, potentially disclosing sensitive internal data and, depending on the internal service reached, affecting its state. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102094 | 2026-09-30 | 7.2 High | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Unsafe Reflection and does not sufficiently restrict the code that the mail-processing pipeline could load from an imported rule configuration. An authenticated administrator with mail-rule configuration privileges could cause the gateway to load and execute code beyond the approved set of mail-processing components, potentially in the context of the mail-gateway service account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-102089 | 2026-09-30 | 7.2 High | ||
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to a path traversal weakness in an administrative import function allowed an authenticated administrator to write files to arbitrary locations on the server. This could potentially be leveraged to execute arbitrary code on the underlying system. | ||||
| CVE-2026-97316 | 2026-09-30 | 5.8 Medium | ||
| The Broken Link Notifier WordPress plugin before 2.0.0.1 does not re-validate the destination of redirects when checking links, allowing unauthenticated attackers to bypass its internal-address filter and make the server send requests to internal services. | ||||
| CVE-2026-75969 | 2026-09-30 | N/A | ||
| Missing authentication for critical function vulnerability for all PTZOptics cameras and the Firmware Upgrade Tool - Firmware Update modules. A missing authentication vulnerability in the firmware update mechanism of affected PTZOptics cameras allows an unauthenticated user to install modified firmware on the device without administrator credentials. This vulnerability allows attackers to upload modified firmware to the device without admin credentials. This issue affects: * Move 4K 12X before: 0.0.98 * Move 4K 20X before: 0.1.33 * Move 4K 30X before: 2.1.17 * Link 4K 12X before: 0.0.99 * Link 4K 20X before: 0.1.37 * Link 4K 30X before: 2.1.18 * Move SE 12X before: 9.1.66 * Move SE 20X before: 9.1.44 * Move SE 30X before: 9.1.46 * Studio 4K 12X before: 8.3.32 * Studio 4K 20X before: 8.3.32 * Studio SE 12X before: 8.3.32 * Studio SE 20X before: 8.3.32 * All Generation 2 cameras, including: PT12X-SDI-GY-G2, PT12X-SDI-WH-G2, PT12X-NDI-GY-G2, PT12X-NDI-WH-G2; PT12X-USB-GY-G2, PT12X-USB-WH-G2; PT20X-SDI-GY-G2, PT20X-SDI-WH-G2, PT20X-NDI-GY-G2, PT20X-NDI-WH-G2; PT20X-USB-GY-G2, PT20X-USB-WH-G2; PT30X-SDI-GY-G2, PT30X-SDI-WH-G2, PT30X-NDI-GY-G2, PT30X-NDI-WH-G2; PTVL-ZCAM, PTVL-NDI-ZCAM; PTEPTZ-ZCAM-G2, PTEPTZ-NDI-ZCAM-G2; PT12X-ZCAM, PT12X-NDI-ZCAM; PT20X-ZCAM, PT20X-NDI-ZCAM; Studio Pro - All versions * Upgrade Tool - All versions | ||||