🚨 CVE-2025-54820
A Stack-based Buffer Overflow vulnerability [CWE-121] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiManager 7.4.0 through 7.4.2, FortiManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.10, FortiManager 6.4 all versions may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests, if the service is enabled. The success of the attack depends on the ability to bypass the stack protection mechanisms.
🎖@cveNotify
A Stack-based Buffer Overflow vulnerability [CWE-121] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiManager 7.4.0 through 7.4.2, FortiManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.10, FortiManager 6.4 all versions may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests, if the service is enabled. The success of the attack depends on the ability to bypass the stack protection mechanisms.
🎖@cveNotify
FortiGuard Labs
PSIRT | FortiGuard Labs
None
🚨 CVE-2026-32059
OpenClaw version 2026.2.22-2 prior to 2026.2.23 tools.exec.safeBins validation for sort command fails to properly validate GNU long-option abbreviations, allowing attackers to bypass denied-flag checks via abbreviated options. Remote attackers can execute sort commands with abbreviated long options to skip approval requirements in allowlist mode.
🎖@cveNotify
OpenClaw version 2026.2.22-2 prior to 2026.2.23 tools.exec.safeBins validation for sort command fails to properly validate GNU long-option abbreviations, allowing attackers to bypass denied-flag checks via abbreviated options. Remote attackers can execute sort commands with abbreviated long options to skip approval requirements in allowlist mode.
🎖@cveNotify
GitHub
fix(security): harden safeBins long-option validation · openclaw/openclaw@3b8e330
Your own personal AI assistant. Any OS. Any Platform. The lobster way. 🦞 - fix(security): harden safeBins long-option validation · openclaw/openclaw@3b8e330
🚨 CVE-2026-27704
The Dart and Flutter SDKs provide software development kits for the Dart programming language. In versions of the Dart SDK prior to 3.11.0 and the Flutter SDK prior to version 3.41.0, when the pub client (`dart pub` and `flutter pub`) extracts a package in the pub cache, a malicious package archive can have files extracted outside the destination directory in the `PUB_CACHE`. A fix has been landed in commit 26c6985c742593d081f8b58450f463a584a4203a. By normalizing the file path before writing file, the attacker can no longer traverse up via a symlink. This patch is released in Dart 3.11.0 and Flutter 3.41.0.vAll packages on pub.dev have been vetted for this vulnerability. New packages are no longer allowed to contain symlinks. The pub client itself doesn't upload symlinks, but duplicates the linked entry, and has been doing this for years. Those whose dependencies are all from pub.dev, third-party repositories trusted to not contain malicious code, or git dependencies are not affected by this vulnerability.
🎖@cveNotify
The Dart and Flutter SDKs provide software development kits for the Dart programming language. In versions of the Dart SDK prior to 3.11.0 and the Flutter SDK prior to version 3.41.0, when the pub client (`dart pub` and `flutter pub`) extracts a package in the pub cache, a malicious package archive can have files extracted outside the destination directory in the `PUB_CACHE`. A fix has been landed in commit 26c6985c742593d081f8b58450f463a584a4203a. By normalizing the file path before writing file, the attacker can no longer traverse up via a symlink. This patch is released in Dart 3.11.0 and Flutter 3.41.0.vAll packages on pub.dev have been vetted for this vulnerability. New packages are no longer allowed to contain symlinks. The pub client itself doesn't upload symlinks, but duplicates the linked entry, and has been doing this for years. Those whose dependencies are all from pub.dev, third-party repositories trusted to not contain malicious code, or git dependencies are not affected by this vulnerability.
🎖@cveNotify
GitHub
Normalize path before writing file when extracting tar.gz (#4752) · dart-lang/pub@26c6985
The pub command line tool. Contribute to dart-lang/pub development by creating an account on GitHub.
🚨 CVE-2025-54236
Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha2, 2.4.8-p2, 2.4.7-p7, 2.4.6-p12, 2.4.5-p14, 2.4.4-p15 and earlier are affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability. A successful attacker can abuse this to achieve session takeover, increasing the confidentiality, and integrity impact to high. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
🎖@cveNotify
Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha2, 2.4.8-p2, 2.4.7-p7, 2.4.6-p12, 2.4.5-p14, 2.4.4-p15 and earlier are affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability. A successful attacker can abuse this to achieve session takeover, increasing the confidentiality, and integrity impact to high. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
🎖@cveNotify
Adobe
Adobe Security Bulletin
Security Updates Available for Adobe Commerce | APSB25-88
🚨 CVE-2026-22866
Ethereum Name Service (ENS) is a distributed, open, and extensible naming system based on the Ethereum blockchain. In versions 1.6.2 and prior, the `RSASHA256Algorithm` and `RSASHA1Algorithm` contracts fail to validate PKCS#1 v1.5 padding structure when verifying RSA signatures. The contracts only check if the last 32 (or 20) bytes of the decrypted signature match the expected hash. This enables Bleichenbacher's 2006 signature forgery attack against DNS zones using RSA keys with low public exponents (e=3). Two ENS-supported TLDs (.cc and .name) use e=3 for their Key Signing Keys, allowing any domain under these TLDs to be fraudulently claimed on ENS without DNS ownership. Apatch was merged at commit c76c5ad0dc9de1c966443bd946fafc6351f87587. Possible workarounds include deploying the patched contracts and pointing DNSSECImpl.setAlgorithm to the deployed contract.
🎖@cveNotify
Ethereum Name Service (ENS) is a distributed, open, and extensible naming system based on the Ethereum blockchain. In versions 1.6.2 and prior, the `RSASHA256Algorithm` and `RSASHA1Algorithm` contracts fail to validate PKCS#1 v1.5 padding structure when verifying RSA signatures. The contracts only check if the last 32 (or 20) bytes of the decrypted signature match the expected hash. This enables Bleichenbacher's 2006 signature forgery attack against DNS zones using RSA keys with low public exponents (e=3). Two ENS-supported TLDs (.cc and .name) use e=3 for their Key Signing Keys, allowing any domain under these TLDs to be fraudulently claimed on ENS without DNS ownership. Apatch was merged at commit c76c5ad0dc9de1c966443bd946fafc6351f87587. Possible workarounds include deploying the patched contracts and pointing DNSSECImpl.setAlgorithm to the deployed contract.
🎖@cveNotify
GitHub
GitHub - ensdomains/ens-contracts-bug-62248-pr-509: bug-62248-pr-509 deployment instruction
bug-62248-pr-509 deployment instruction. Contribute to ensdomains/ens-contracts-bug-62248-pr-509 development by creating an account on GitHub.
🚨 CVE-2021-35486
A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Nokia IMPACT through 19.11.2.10-20210118042150283 allows a remote attacker to import and overwrite the entire application configuration. Specifically, in /ui/rest-proxy/entity/import, neither the X-CSRF-NONCE HTTP header nor the CSRF-NONCE cookie is validated.
🎖@cveNotify
A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Nokia IMPACT through 19.11.2.10-20210118042150283 allows a remote attacker to import and overwrite the entire application configuration. Specifically, in /ui/rest-proxy/entity/import, neither the X-CSRF-NONCE HTTP header nor the CSRF-NONCE cookie is validated.
🎖@cveNotify
www.gruppotim.it
CVE-2021-35486 – Motive IMPACT
🚨 CVE-2025-69534
Python-Markdown version 3.8 contain a vulnerability where malformed HTML-like sequences can cause html.parser.HTMLParser to raise an unhandled AssertionError during Markdown parsing. Because Python-Markdown does not catch this exception, any application that processes attacker-controlled Markdown may crash. This enables remote, unauthenticated Denial of Service in web applications, documentation systems, CI/CD pipelines, and any service that renders untrusted Markdown. The issue was acknowledged by the vendor and fixed in version 3.8.1. This issue causes a remote Denial of Service in any application parsing untrusted Markdown, and can lead to Information Disclosure through uncaught exceptions.
🎖@cveNotify
Python-Markdown version 3.8 contain a vulnerability where malformed HTML-like sequences can cause html.parser.HTMLParser to raise an unhandled AssertionError during Markdown parsing. Because Python-Markdown does not catch this exception, any application that processes attacker-controlled Markdown may crash. This enables remote, unauthenticated Denial of Service in web applications, documentation systems, CI/CD pipelines, and any service that renders untrusted Markdown. The issue was acknowledged by the vendor and fixed in version 3.8.1. This issue causes a remote Denial of Service in any application parsing untrusted Markdown, and can lead to Information Disclosure through uncaught exceptions.
🎖@cveNotify
GitHub
GitHub - Python-Markdown/markdown: A Python implementation of John Gruber’s Markdown with Extension support.
A Python implementation of John Gruber’s Markdown with Extension support. - Python-Markdown/markdown
🚨 CVE-2026-27748
Avira Internet Security contains an improper link resolution vulnerability in the Software Updater component. During the update process, a privileged service running as SYSTEM deletes a file under C:\\ProgramData without validating whether the path resolves through a symbolic link or reparse point. A local attacker can create a malicious link to redirect the delete operation to an arbitrary file, resulting in deletion of attacker-chosen files with SYSTEM privileges. This may lead to local privilege escalation, denial of service, or system integrity compromise depending on the targeted file and operating system configuration.
🎖@cveNotify
Avira Internet Security contains an improper link resolution vulnerability in the Software Updater component. During the update process, a privileged service running as SYSTEM deletes a file under C:\\ProgramData without validating whether the path resolves through a symbolic link or reparse point. A local attacker can create a malicious link to redirect the delete operation to an arbitrary file, resulting in deletion of attacker-chosen files with SYSTEM privileges. This may lead to local privilege escalation, denial of service, or system integrity compromise depending on the targeted file and operating system configuration.
🎖@cveNotify
Quarkslab
Avira: Deserialize, Delete and Escalate - The Proper Way to Use an AV - Quarkslab's blog
Three vulnerabilities in Avira Internet Security, from an arbitrary file delete primitive to two distinct paths to SYSTEM privileges.
🚨 CVE-2026-27749
Avira Internet Security contains a deserialization of untrusted data vulnerability in the System Speedup component. The Avira.SystemSpeedup.RealTimeOptimizer.exe process, which runs with SYSTEM privileges, deserializes data from a file located in C:\\ProgramData using .NET BinaryFormatter without implementing input validation or deserialization safeguards. Because the file can be created or modified by a local user in default configurations, an attacker can supply a crafted serialized payload that is deserialized by the privileged process, resulting in arbitrary code execution as SYSTEM.
🎖@cveNotify
Avira Internet Security contains a deserialization of untrusted data vulnerability in the System Speedup component. The Avira.SystemSpeedup.RealTimeOptimizer.exe process, which runs with SYSTEM privileges, deserializes data from a file located in C:\\ProgramData using .NET BinaryFormatter without implementing input validation or deserialization safeguards. Because the file can be created or modified by a local user in default configurations, an attacker can supply a crafted serialized payload that is deserialized by the privileged process, resulting in arbitrary code execution as SYSTEM.
🎖@cveNotify
Quarkslab
Avira: Deserialize, Delete and Escalate - The Proper Way to Use an AV - Quarkslab's blog
Three vulnerabilities in Avira Internet Security, from an arbitrary file delete primitive to two distinct paths to SYSTEM privileges.
🚨 CVE-2026-27750
Avira Internet Security contains a time-of-check time-of-use (TOCTOU) vulnerability in the Optimizer component. A privileged service running as SYSTEM identifies directories for cleanup during a scan phase and subsequently deletes them during a separate cleanup phase without revalidating the target path. A local attacker can replace a previously scanned directory with a junction or reparse point before deletion occurs, causing the privileged process to delete an unintended system location. This may result in deletion of protected files or directories and can lead to local privilege escalation, denial of service, or system integrity compromise depending on the affected target.
🎖@cveNotify
Avira Internet Security contains a time-of-check time-of-use (TOCTOU) vulnerability in the Optimizer component. A privileged service running as SYSTEM identifies directories for cleanup during a scan phase and subsequently deletes them during a separate cleanup phase without revalidating the target path. A local attacker can replace a previously scanned directory with a junction or reparse point before deletion occurs, causing the privileged process to delete an unintended system location. This may result in deletion of protected files or directories and can lead to local privilege escalation, denial of service, or system integrity compromise depending on the affected target.
🎖@cveNotify
Quarkslab
Avira: Deserialize, Delete and Escalate - The Proper Way to Use an AV - Quarkslab's blog
Three vulnerabilities in Avira Internet Security, from an arbitrary file delete primitive to two distinct paths to SYSTEM privileges.
🚨 CVE-2026-22052
ONTAP versions 9.12.1 and higher with S3 NAS buckets are susceptible to an information disclosure vulnerability. Successful exploit could allow an authenticated attacker to view a listing of the contents in a directory for which they lack permission.
🎖@cveNotify
ONTAP versions 9.12.1 and higher with S3 NAS buckets are susceptible to an information disclosure vulnerability. Successful exploit could allow an authenticated attacker to view a listing of the contents in a directory for which they lack permission.
🎖@cveNotify
Netapp
NetApp Product Security
NetApp is an industry leader in developing and implementing product security standards. Learn how we can help you maintain the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of your data.
🚨 CVE-2026-21628
A improperly secured file management feature allows uploads of dangerous data types for unauthenticated users, leading to remote code execution.
🎖@cveNotify
A improperly secured file management feature allows uploads of dangerous data types for unauthenticated users, leading to remote code execution.
🎖@cveNotify
Astroid
Astroid Framework | Best Free Joomla Template Framework
Powerful framework for designers and developers to create responsive, fast & robust Joomla based websites and templates.
🚨 CVE-2026-3236
In affected versions of Octopus Server it was possible to create a new API key from an existing access token resulting in the new API key having a lifetime exceeding the original API key used to mint the access token.
🎖@cveNotify
In affected versions of Octopus Server it was possible to create a new API key from an existing access token resulting in the new API key having a lifetime exceeding the original API key used to mint the access token.
🎖@cveNotify
Octopus
Security Advisory 2026-02
2026-02 - Access Token can be used to create new API key with extended lifetime
🚨 CVE-2026-2415
Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained two security-relevant
bugs:
*
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for the email subject.
*
Placeholders in subjects and plain text bodies of emails were
wrongfully evaluated twice. Therefore, if the first evaluation of a
placeholder again contains a placeholder, this second placeholder was
rendered. This allows the rendering of placeholders controlled by the
ticket buyer, and therefore the exploitation of the first issue as a
ticket buyer. Luckily, the only buyer-controlled placeholder available
in pretix by default (that is not validated in a way that prevents the
issue) is {invoice_company}, which is very unusual (but not
impossible) to be contained in an email subject template. In addition
to broadening the attack surface of the first issue, this could
theoretically also leak information about an order to one of the
attendees within that order. However, we also consider this scenario
very unlikely under typical conditions.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg https://docs.pretix.eu/self-hosting/config/ file.
🎖@cveNotify
Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained two security-relevant
bugs:
*
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for the email subject.
*
Placeholders in subjects and plain text bodies of emails were
wrongfully evaluated twice. Therefore, if the first evaluation of a
placeholder again contains a placeholder, this second placeholder was
rendered. This allows the rendering of placeholders controlled by the
ticket buyer, and therefore the exploitation of the first issue as a
ticket buyer. Luckily, the only buyer-controlled placeholder available
in pretix by default (that is not validated in a way that prevents the
issue) is {invoice_company}, which is very unusual (but not
impossible) to be contained in an email subject template. In addition
to broadening the attack surface of the first issue, this could
theoretically also leak information about an order to one of the
attendees within that order. However, we also consider this scenario
very unlikely under typical conditions.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg https://docs.pretix.eu/self-hosting/config/ file.
🎖@cveNotify
pretix.eu
Security release 2026.1.1 of pretix
Today, we are releasing pretix 2025.6.1 and updates for some plugins fixing security-relevant bugs with high severity.
Please make sure to update your pretix installation as soon as possible.
Please make sure to update your pretix installation as soon as possible.
🚨 CVE-2026-2451
Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained a security-relevant bug:
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for this plugin.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg file.
🎖@cveNotify
Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained a security-relevant bug:
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for this plugin.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg file.
🎖@cveNotify
pretix.eu
Security release 2026.1.1 of pretix
Today, we are releasing pretix 2025.6.1 and updates for some plugins fixing security-relevant bugs with high severity.
Please make sure to update your pretix installation as soon as possible.
Please make sure to update your pretix installation as soon as possible.
🚨 CVE-2025-13690
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an authenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation on webhook custom header names under certain conditions.
🎖@cveNotify
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an authenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation on webhook custom header names under certain conditions.
🎖@cveNotify
🚨 CVE-2025-13929
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.0 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by issuing specially crafted requests to repository archive endpoints under certain conditions.
🎖@cveNotify
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.0 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by issuing specially crafted requests to repository archive endpoints under certain conditions.
🎖@cveNotify
🚨 CVE-2025-14513
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation when processing specially crafted JSON payloads in the protected branches API.
🎖@cveNotify
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation when processing specially crafted JSON payloads in the protected branches API.
🎖@cveNotify
🚨 CVE-2026-1069
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by sending specially crafted GraphQL requests due to uncontrolled recursion under certain circumstances.
🎖@cveNotify
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by sending specially crafted GraphQL requests due to uncontrolled recursion under certain circumstances.
🎖@cveNotify
❤2
🚨 CVE-2025-54236
Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha2, 2.4.8-p2, 2.4.7-p7, 2.4.6-p12, 2.4.5-p14, 2.4.4-p15 and earlier are affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability. A successful attacker can abuse this to achieve session takeover, increasing the confidentiality, and integrity impact to high. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
🎖@cveNotify
Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha2, 2.4.8-p2, 2.4.7-p7, 2.4.6-p12, 2.4.5-p14, 2.4.4-p15 and earlier are affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability. A successful attacker can abuse this to achieve session takeover, increasing the confidentiality, and integrity impact to high. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
🎖@cveNotify
Adobe
Adobe Security Bulletin
Security Updates Available for Adobe Commerce | APSB25-88
🚨 CVE-2024-14024
An improper certificate validation vulnerability has been reported to affect Video Station. If an attacker gains local network access who have also gained an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to compromise the security of the system.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version:
Video Station 5.8.2 and later
🎖@cveNotify
An improper certificate validation vulnerability has been reported to affect Video Station. If an attacker gains local network access who have also gained an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to compromise the security of the system.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version:
Video Station 5.8.2 and later
🎖@cveNotify