Export limit exceeded: 414219 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (988 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-11957 | 1 Kingsoft | 1 Wps Office | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| Improper verification of the digital signature in ksojscore.dll in Kingsoft WPS Office in versions equal or less than 12.1.0.18276 on Windows allows an attacker to load an arbitrary Windows library. The patch released in version 12.2.0.16909 to mitigate CVE-2024-7262 was not restrictive enough. | ||||
| CVE-2025-24800 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| Hyperbridge is a hyper-scalable coprocessor for verifiable, cross-chain interoperability. A critical vulnerability was discovered in the ismp-grandpa crate, that allowed a malicious prover easily convince the verifier of the finality of arbitrary headers. This could be used to steal funds or compromise other kinds of cross-chain applications. This vulnerability is fixed in 15.0.1. | ||||
| CVE-2025-54549 | 1 Arista | 1 Danz Monitoring Fabric | 2026-04-15 | 5.9 Medium |
| Cryptographic validation of upgrade images could be circumventing by dropping a specifically crafted file into the upgrade ISO | ||||
| CVE-2025-54419 | 1 Node-saml | 1 Node-saml | 2026-04-15 | 10 Critical |
| A SAML library not dependent on any frameworks that runs in Node. In version 5.0.1, Node-SAML loads the assertion from the (unsigned) original response document. This is different than the parts that are verified when checking signature. This allows an attacker to modify authentication details within a valid SAML assertion. For example, in one attack it is possible to remove any character from the SAML assertion username. To conduct the attack an attacker would need a validly signed document from the identity provider (IdP). This is fixed in version 5.1.0. | ||||
| CVE-2025-54369 | 1 Node-saml | 1 Node-saml | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| Node-SAML is a SAML library not dependent on any frameworks that runs in Node. In versions 5.0.1 and below, Node-SAML loads the assertion from the (unsigned) original response document. This is different than the parts that are verified when checking signature. This allows an attacker to modify authentication details within a valid SAML assertion. For example, in one attack it is possible to remove any character from the SAML assertion username. This issue is fixed in version 5.1.0. | ||||
| CVE-2025-52556 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to version 1.0.3, there is a flaw in the timestamp response signature verification logic. In particular, chain verification is performed against the TSR's embedded certificates up to the trusted root(s), but fails to verify the TSR's own signature against the timestamping leaf certificates. Consequently, vulnerable versions perform insufficient signature validation to properly consider a TSR verified, as the attacker can introduce any TSR signature so long as the embedded leaf chains up to some root TSA. This issue has been patched in version 1.0.3. There is no workaround for this issue. | ||||
| CVE-2023-52043 | 2026-04-15 | 8.1 High | ||
| An issue in D-Link COVR 1100, 1102, 1103 AC1200 Dual-Band Whole-Home Mesh Wi-Fi System (Hardware Rev B1) truncates Wireless Access Point Passwords (WPA-PSK) allowing an attacker to gain unauthorized network access via weak authentication controls. | ||||
| CVE-2025-4371 | 2026-04-15 | 6.8 Medium | ||
| A potential vulnerability was reported in the Lenovo 510 FHD and Performance FHD web cameras that could allow an attacker with physical access to write arbitrary firmware updates to the device over a USB connection. | ||||
| CVE-2024-54126 | 1 Tp-link | 1 Archer C50 Firmware | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| This vulnerability exists in the TP-Link Archer C50 due to improper signature verification mechanism in the firmware upgrade process at its web interface. An attacker with administrative privileges within the router’s Wi-Fi range could exploit this vulnerability by uploading and executing malicious firmware which could lead to complete compromise of the targeted device. | ||||
| CVE-2025-27773 | 1 Simplesamlphp | 1 Saml2 | 2026-04-15 | 8.6 High |
| The SimpleSAMLphp SAML2 library is a PHP library for SAML2 related functionality. Prior to versions 4.17.0 and 5.0.0-alpha.20, there is a signature confusion attack in the HTTPRedirect binding. An attacker with any signed SAMLResponse via the HTTP-Redirect binding can cause the application to accept an unsigned message. Versions 4.17.0 and 5.0.0-alpha.20 contain a fix for the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2025-27813 | 2026-04-15 | 8.1 High | ||
| MSI Center before 2.0.52.0 has Missing PE Signature Validation. | ||||
| CVE-2025-29774 | 1 Redhat | 1 Rhdh | 2026-04-15 | 9.1 Critical |
| xml-crypto is an XML digital signature and encryption library for Node.js. An attacker may be able to exploit a vulnerability in versions prior to 6.0.1, 3.2.1, and 2.1.6 to bypass authentication or authorization mechanisms in systems that rely on xml-crypto for verifying signed XML documents. The vulnerability allows an attacker to modify a valid signed XML message in a way that still passes signature verification checks. For example, it could be used to alter critical identity or access control attributes, enabling an attacker with a valid account to escalate privileges or impersonate another user. Users of versions 6.0.0 and prior should upgrade to version 6.0.1 to receive a fix. Those who are still using v2.x or v3.x should upgrade to patched versions 2.1.6 or 3.2.1, respectively. | ||||
| CVE-2025-40778 | 1 Isc | 1 Bind 9 | 2026-04-15 | 8.6 High |
| Under certain circumstances, BIND is too lenient when accepting records from answers, allowing an attacker to inject forged data into the cache. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.11.0 through 9.16.50, 9.18.0 through 9.18.39, 9.20.0 through 9.20.13, 9.21.0 through 9.21.12, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.16.50-S1, 9.18.11-S1 through 9.18.39-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.13-S1. | ||||
| CVE-2025-54982 | 1 Zscaler | 1 Authentication Server | 2026-04-15 | 9.6 Critical |
| An improper verification of cryptographic signature in Zscaler's SAML authentication mechanism on the server-side allowed an authentication abuse. | ||||
| CVE-2025-12007 | 1 Supermicro | 1 Mbd-x13sem-f | 2026-04-15 | 8.4 High |
| There is a vulnerability in the Supermicro BMC firmware validation logic at Supermicro MBD-X13SEM-F . An attacker can update the system firmware with a specially crafted image. | ||||
| CVE-2025-31489 | 1 Minio | 1 Minio | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High |
| MinIO is a High Performance Object Storage released under GNU Affero General Public License v3.0. The signature component of the authorization may be invalid, which would mean that as a client you can use any arbitrary secret to upload objects given the user already has prior WRITE permissions on the bucket. Prior knowledge of access-key, and bucket name this user might have access to - and an access-key with a WRITE permissions is necessary. However with relevant information in place, uploading random objects to buckets is trivial and easy via curl. This issue is fixed in RELEASE.2025-04-03T14-56-28Z. | ||||
| CVE-2020-36843 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| The implementation of EdDSA in EdDSA-Java (aka ed25519-java) through 0.3.0 exhibits signature malleability and does not satisfy the SUF-CMA (Strong Existential Unforgeability under Chosen Message Attacks) property. This allows attackers to create new valid signatures different from previous signatures for a known message. | ||||
| CVE-2025-29775 | 1 Redhat | 1 Rhdh | 2026-04-15 | 9.1 Critical |
| xml-crypto is an XML digital signature and encryption library for Node.js. An attacker may be able to exploit a vulnerability in versions prior to 6.0.1, 3.2.1, and 2.1.6 to bypass authentication or authorization mechanisms in systems that rely on xml-crypto for verifying signed XML documents. The vulnerability allows an attacker to modify a valid signed XML message in a way that still passes signature verification checks. For example, it could be used to alter critical identity or access control attributes, enabling an attacker to escalate privileges or impersonate another user. Users of versions 6.0.0 and prior should upgrade to version 6.0.1 to receive a fix. Those who are still using v2.x or v3.x should upgrade to patched versions 2.1.6 or 3.2.1, respectively. | ||||
| CVE-2025-7937 | 1 Supermicro | 1 Mbd-x12stw | 2026-04-15 | 7.2 High |
| There is a vulnerability in the Supermicro BMC firmware validation logic at Supermicro MBD-X12STW . An attacker can update the system firmware with a specially crafted image. | ||||
| CVE-2025-47934 | 1 Openpgpjs | 1 Openpgpjs | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| OpenPGP.js is a JavaScript implementation of the OpenPGP protocol. Startinf in version 5.0.1 and prior to versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1, a maliciously modified message can be passed to either `openpgp.verify` or `openpgp.decrypt`, causing these functions to return a valid signature verification result while returning data that was not actually signed. This flaw allows signature verifications of inline (non-detached) signed messages (using `openpgp.verify`) and signed-and-encrypted messages (using `openpgp.decrypt` with `verificationKeys`) to be spoofed, since both functions return extracted data that may not match the data that was originally signed. Detached signature verifications are not affected, as no signed data is returned in that case. In order to spoof a message, the attacker needs a single valid message signature (inline or detached) as well as the plaintext data that was legitimately signed, and can then construct an inline-signed message or signed-and-encrypted message with any data of the attacker's choice, which will appear as legitimately signed by affected versions of OpenPGP.js. In other words, any inline-signed message can be modified to return any other data (while still indicating that the signature was valid), and the same is true for signed+encrypted messages if the attacker can obtain a valid signature and encrypt a new message (of the attacker's choice) together with that signature. The issue has been patched in versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1. Some workarounds are available. When verifying inline-signed messages, extract the message and signature(s) from the message returned by `openpgp.readMessage`, and verify the(/each) signature as a detached signature by passing the signature and a new message containing only the data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. When decrypting and verifying signed+encrypted messages, decrypt and verify the message in two steps, by first calling `openpgp.decrypt` without `verificationKeys`, and then passing the returned signature(s) and a new message containing the decrypted data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. | ||||