Total
12838 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-0021 | 1 Google | 1 Android | 2024-12-16 | 7.8 High |
| In onCreate of NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity.java, there is a possible way for an app in the work profile to enable notification listener services due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation. | ||||
| CVE-2018-12123 | 2 Nodejs, Redhat | 2 Node.js, Rhel Software Collections | 2024-12-13 | 4.3 Medium |
| Node.js: All versions prior to Node.js 6.15.0, 8.14.0, 10.14.0 and 11.3.0: Hostname spoofing in URL parser for javascript protocol: If a Node.js application is using url.parse() to determine the URL hostname, that hostname can be spoofed by using a mixed case "javascript:" (e.g. "javAscript:") protocol (other protocols are not affected). If security decisions are made about the URL based on the hostname, they may be incorrect. | ||||
| CVE-2024-43052 | 1 Qualcomm | 185 205 Mobile Platform, 205 Mobile Platform Firmware, 215 Mobile Platform and 182 more | 2024-12-12 | 7.8 High |
| Memory corruption while processing API calls to NPU with invalid input. | ||||
| CVE-2024-12355 | 1 Razormist | 1 Phone Contact Manager System | 2024-12-12 | 3.3 Low |
| A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Phone Contact Manager System 1.0 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function ContactBook::adding of the file ContactBook.cpp. The manipulation leads to improper input validation. The attack needs to be approached locally. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. | ||||
| CVE-2024-12353 | 1 Razormist | 1 Phone Contact Manager System | 2024-12-12 | 3.3 Low |
| A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in SourceCodester Phone Contact Manager System 1.0. This issue affects the function UserInterface::MenuDisplayStart of the component User Menu. The manipulation of the argument name leads to improper input validation. Attacking locally is a requirement. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. | ||||
| CVE-2023-31366 | 1 Amd | 1 Uprof | 2024-12-12 | 3.3 Low |
| Improper input validation in AMD μProf could allow an attacker to perform a write to an invalid address, potentially resulting in denial of service. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32989 | 1 Huawei | 2 Emui, Harmonyos | 2024-12-11 | 3.3 Low |
| Insufficient verification vulnerability in the system sharing pop-up module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability will affect availability. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32990 | 1 Huawei | 2 Emui, Harmonyos | 2024-12-11 | 6.1 Medium |
| Permission verification vulnerability in the system sharing pop-up module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability will affect availability. | ||||
| CVE-2024-55655 | 2024-12-11 | N/A | ||
| sigstore-python is a Python tool for generating and verifying Sigstore signatures. Versions of sigstore-python newer than 2.0.0 but prior to 3.6.0 perform insufficient validation of the "integration time" present in "v2" and "v3" bundles during the verification flow: the "integration time" is verified *if* a source of signed time (such as an inclusion promise) is present, but is otherwise trusted if no source of signed time is present. This does not affect "v1" bundles, as the "v1" bundle format always requires an inclusion promise. Sigstore uses signed time to support verification of signatures made against short-lived signing keys. The impact and severity of this weakness is *low*, as Sigstore contains multiple other enforcing components that prevent an attacker who modifies the integration timestamp within a bundle from impersonating a valid signature. In particular, an attacker who modifies the integration timestamp can induce a Denial of Service, but in no different manner than already possible with bundle access (e.g. modifying the signature itself such that it fails to verify). Separately, an attacker could upload a *new* entry to the transparency service, and substitute their new entry's time. However, this would still be rejected at validation time, as the new entry's (valid) signed time would be outside the validity window of the original signing certificate and would nonetheless render the attacker auditable. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32992 | 1 Huawei | 2 Emui, Harmonyos | 2024-12-11 | 7.5 High |
| Insufficient verification vulnerability in the baseband module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability will affect availability. | ||||
| CVE-2024-11737 | 2024-12-11 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| CWE-20: Improper Input Validation vulnerability exists that could lead to a denial of service and a loss of confidentiality, integrity of the controller when an unauthenticated crafted Modbus packet is sent to the device. | ||||
| CVE-2024-54140 | 1 Sigstore | 1 Sigstore-java | 2024-12-10 | N/A |
| sigstore-java is a sigstore java client for interacting with sigstore infrastructure. sigstore-java has insufficient verification for a situation where a bundle provides a invalid signature for a checkpoint. This bug impacts clients using any variation of KeylessVerifier.verify(). Currently checkpoints are only used to ensure the root hash of an inclusion proof was provided by the log in question. Failing to validate that means a bundle may provide an inclusion proof that doesn't actually correspond to the log in question. This may eventually lead a monitor/witness being unable to detect when a compromised logs are providing different views of themselves to different clients. There are other mechanisms right now that mitigate this, such as the signed entry timestamp. Sigstore-java currently requires a valid signed entry timestamp. By correctly verifying the signed entry timestamp we can make certain assertions about the log signing the log entry (like the log was aware of the artifact signing event and signed it). Therefore the impact on clients that are not monitors/witnesses is very low. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0. | ||||
| CVE-2023-2808 | 1 Mattermost | 1 Mattermost | 2024-12-06 | 4.3 Medium |
| Mattermost fails to normalize UTF confusable characters when determining if a preview should be generated for a hyperlink, allowing an attacker to trigger link preview on a disallowed domain using a specially crafted link. | ||||
| CVE-2023-0026 | 1 Juniper | 2 Junos, Junos Os Evolved | 2024-12-06 | 7.5 High |
| An Improper Input Validation vulnerability in the Routing Protocol Daemon (rpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). When a BGP update message is received over an established BGP session, and that message contains a specific, optional transitive attribute, this session will be torn down with an update message error. This issue cannot propagate beyond an affected system as the processing error occurs as soon as the update is received. This issue is exploitable remotely as the respective attribute can propagate through unaffected systems and intermediate AS (if any). Continuous receipt of a BGP update containing this attribute will create a sustained Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Some customers have experienced these BGP session flaps which prompted Juniper SIRT to release this advisory out of cycle before fixed releases are widely available as there is an effective workaround. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS 15.1R1 and later versions prior to 20.4R3-S8; 21.1 version 21.1R1 and later versions prior to 21.2R3-S6; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S5; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3-S4; 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3-S4; 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R3-S2; 22.3 versions prior to 22.3R2-S2, 22.3R3-S1; 22.4 versions prior to 22.4R2-S1, 22.4R3; 23.1 versions prior to 23.1R1-S1, 23.1R2. Juniper Networks Junos OS Evolved All versions prior to 20.4R3-S8-EVO; 21.1 version 21.1R1-EVO and later versions prior to 21.2R3-S6-EVO; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S5-EVO; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3-S4-EVO; 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3-S4-EVO; 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R3-S2-EVO; 22.3 versions prior to 22.3R2-S2-EVO, 22.3R3-S1-EVO; 22.4 versions prior to 22.4R2-S1-EVO, 22.4R3-EVO; 23.1 versions prior to 23.1R1-S1-EVO, 23.1R2-EVO. | ||||
| CVE-2024-28103 | 2 Rails, Rubyonrails | 2 Rails, Rails | 2024-12-06 | 5.4 Medium |
| Action Pack is a framework for handling and responding to web requests. Since 6.1.0, the application configurable Permissions-Policy is only served on responses with an HTML related Content-Type. This vulnerability is fixed in 6.1.7.8, 7.0.8.2, and 7.1.3.3. | ||||
| CVE-2023-21192 | 1 Google | 1 Android | 2024-12-04 | 7.8 High |
| In setInputMethodWithSubtypeIdLocked of InputMethodManagerService.java, there is a possible way to setup input methods that are not enabled due to improper input validation. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-13Android ID: A-227207653 | ||||
| CVE-2023-28026 | 1 Dell | 868 Alienware Area 51m R1, Alienware Area 51m R1 Firmware, Alienware Area 51m R2 and 865 more | 2024-12-04 | 5.1 Medium |
| Dell BIOS contains an improper input validation vulnerability. A local authenticated malicious user with administrator privileges may potentially exploit this vulnerability in order to modify a UEFI variable. | ||||
| CVE-2024-11985 | 2024-12-04 | 4.4 Medium | ||
| An improper input validation vulnerability leads to device crashes in certain ASUS router models. Refer to the '12/03/2024 ASUS Router Improper Input Validation' section on the ASUS Security Advisory for more information. | ||||
| CVE-2023-44345 | 3 Adobe, Apple, Microsoft | 3 Indesign, Macos, Windows | 2024-12-02 | 5.5 Medium |
| Adobe InDesign versions ID18.5 (and earlier) and ID17.4.2 (and earlier) are affected by a Improper Input Validation vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker could leverage this vulnerability to achieve an application denial-of-service in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. | ||||
| CVE-2018-0104 | 1 Cisco | 4 Webex Business Suite, Webex Meetings, Webex Meetings Server and 1 more | 2024-12-02 | N/A |
| A vulnerability in Cisco WebEx Network Recording Player for Advanced Recording Format (ARF) files could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code on the system of a targeted user. The attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending the user a link or email attachment with a malicious ARF file and persuading the user to follow the link or launch the file. Successful exploitation could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary code on the user's system. This vulnerability affects Cisco WebEx Business Suite meeting sites, Cisco WebEx Meetings sites, Cisco WebEx Meetings Server, and Cisco WebEx ARF players. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg78853, CSCvg78856, CSCvg78857. | ||||