| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
xfrm: iptfs: fix stack OOB read in iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk()
iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk() advances to the fragment containing @offset
with an unbounded loop:
while (offset >= walk->past + walk->frags[walk->fragi].len)
walk->past += walk->frags[walk->fragi++].len;
walk->fragi is advanced and walk->frags[walk->fragi] is dereferenced
without ever checking fragi against walk->nr_frags. When the requested
offset is at or beyond the total length spanned by the walk's fragments,
fragi runs past nr_frags and off the end of the fixed-size on-stack
frags[MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1] array, reading out-of-bounds stack memory.
The two callers behave differently: iptfs_skb_add_frags() already guards
against this with
if (!walk->nr_frags ||
offset >= walk->total + walk->initial_offset)
return len;
but iptfs_skb_can_add_frags() has no such guard and calls
iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk() unconditionally, so it performs the
out-of-range walk. Its own "fragi < walk->nr_frags" bound check runs only
afterwards, too late to prevent the read.
This is reachable from the receive path: a crafted IP-TFS (AGGFRAG)
payload delivered to an IPTFS SA drives iptfs_reassem_cont() ->
iptfs_skb_can_add_frags() with an offset past the fragment total, e.g.:
BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk+0x235/0x250
Read of size 4 at addr ffff888008ad7210 by task repro/345
iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk+0x235/0x250 net/xfrm/xfrm_iptfs.c:392
iptfs_skb_can_add_frags+0x155/0x310 net/xfrm/xfrm_iptfs.c:420
iptfs_reassem_cont+0xcf8/0x1140 net/xfrm/xfrm_iptfs.c:902
iptfs_input_ordered+0x552/0x670 net/xfrm/xfrm_iptfs.c:1280
iptfs_input+0x3d6/0xde0 net/xfrm/xfrm_iptfs.c:1741
xfrm_input+0x282f/0x6140 net/xfrm/xfrm_input.c:700
xfrm4_esp_rcv+0x93/0x120 net/ipv4/xfrm4_protocol.c:104
ip_rcv+0x278/0x2d0 net/ipv4/ip_input.c:612
Give iptfs_skb_can_add_frags() the same up-front guard that
iptfs_skb_add_frags() already has, so the walk is never entered with an
out-of-range offset. When it triggers, the caller falls back to the
existing linearize-and-copy path, which is safe. |
| Dell Container Storage Modules (CSM), versions prior to v1.18.0, contains a Missing Authentication for Critical Function vulnerability in the csm-authorization-storage gRPC server. An unauthenticated remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to unauthorized access to storage backend administrator credentials for all registered storage arrays. |
| Dell Container Storage Modules, versions prior to 1.18.0, contain(s) a Missing Authentication for Critical Function vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. |
| Dell Container Storage Modules (CSM) Operator, versions prior to 1.18.0 contains an Improper Privilege Management vulnerability in the ContainerStorageModule Custom Resource reconciler. A low privileged remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to escalation of privileges and gaining root-level access on cluster nodes. |
| Allocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability in ESET PROTECT On-Prem increased resource consumption (CPU and RAM), leading to conditions for a Denial-of-Service attack. |
| Dell Container Storage Modules, versions prior to 1.18.0, contain(s) an Use of Hard-coded Credentials vulnerability in the csm-docs. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure.9.8 |
| Payload is a free and open source headless content management system. In versions before 3.90.0 and canary versions before 4.0.0-canary.34, the server fails to enforce a field-level access.update restriction on the password field of an authentication collection. This issue is fixed in versions 3.90.0 and 4.0.0-canary.34. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.13.0 until 2.14.0, PyJWT HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key is affected because HMAC key guard only recognizes top-level public JWK forms and misses container representations. This occurs when an application allows HMAC and asymmetric algorithms and passes a public JWK container as the raw key. As a result, public asymmetric key material is accepted as the HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge a token with arbitrary authenticated claims. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.9.0 until 2.14.0, PyJWKSet does not catch the plain ValueError raised for malformed RSA JWK components by RSAAlgorithm.from_jwk in jwt/api_jwk.py. This occurs when a JWK Set contains a malformed RSA key alongside otherwise usable keys. As a result, one malformed member aborts construction of the entire PyJWKSet. Consequently, applications can experience authentication failures or request-level denial of service. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| Dell System Update, versions prior to 2.3.0.0, contains an Improper Access Control vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. |
| Dell System Update, versions prior to 2.3.0.0, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Elevation of privileges. |
| In BluetoothCccHandlerCallbackImpl of bluetooth_ccc.cc, there is a possible use-after-free due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to remote code execution with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. |
| Missing authorization in the global vault in Devolutions Server 2026.3.7.0 and earlier allows an authenticated user with only the global vault view permission to modify and delete global contact and folder entries. |
| A DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the Ansible Platform UI due to unvalidated input handling within the application's redirect route. Specifically, the application extracts a target destination from the next query parameter and directly assigns it to the browser's location.href without verifying its format or scheme. The platform includes built-in URL validation functions designed to block malicious URI schemes (such as javascript: and data:) as well as off-site or protocol-relative redirects, this specific route bypasses those controls. Consequently, an attacker can craft a malicious link that, when accessed by an authenticated user, causes arbitrary JavaScript to execute within the context of the user's session. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.1.0 until 2.15.0, PyJWT OKPAlgorithm.from_jwk in jwt/algorithms.py is affected because private-JWK import path does not compare the public key derived from d with x. This occurs when an OKP private JWK supplies non-corresponding x and d components. As a result, identity derived from x can differ from operations performed with d. Consequently, if an integration also accepts private key parameters from a proof header without rejecting them, an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key. This issue is fixed in version 2.15.0. |
| Dell System Update, versions prior to 2.3.0.0, contains an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Remote execution. |
| Authentication bypass in the Azure AD external login flow in Devolutions Server 2026.3.7.0 and earlier allows a remote attacker to take over a user's account via replay of a captured login-session token exposed in a redirect URL. |
| Bacularis 5.4.0 - 6.5.1 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS) in the Organization name field. |
| An issue in Bludit CMS 3.22.0 allows a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information via the /admin/ajax/clippy and /admin/ajax/save-as-draft endpoints |
| An unauthenticated remote attacker can modify Asset Administration Shell submodel data via PATCH requests and can read all data exposed by the GET endpoints. |
