Full List

Search

Recent Vulnerabilities

• CVE-2026-17567 • published on July 31, 2026 The Fluent Forms – Customizable Contact Forms, Survey, Quiz, & Conversational Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 6.2.8 via the 'transaction' parameter due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to brute-force valid transaction hashes and view sensitive payment receipt data including customer name, email address, billing address, order items, payment method, and payment status belonging to other users. Because submission ID, form ID, and transaction creation time are either observable or guessable by an attacker, the effective brute-force space is bounded to approximately 900 candidates per second per (submission, form) pair, making exploitation practical without any prior authentication or account.
• CVE-2026-17567 • published on July 31, 2026 The Fluent Forms – Customizable Contact Forms, Survey, Quiz, & Conversational Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 6.2.8 via the 'transaction' parameter due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to brute-force valid transaction hashes and view sensitive payment receipt data including customer name, email address, billing address, order items, payment method, and payment status belonging to other users. Because submission ID, form ID, and transaction creation time are either observable or guessable by an attacker, the effective brute-force space is bounded to approximately 900 candidates per second per (submission, form) pair, making exploitation practical without any prior authentication or account.
• CVE-2026-17567 • published on July 31, 2026 The Fluent Forms – Customizable Contact Forms, Survey, Quiz, & Conversational Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 6.2.8 via the 'transaction' parameter due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to brute-force valid transaction hashes and view sensitive payment receipt data including customer name, email address, billing address, order items, payment method, and payment status belonging to other users. Because submission ID, form ID, and transaction creation time are either observable or guessable by an attacker, the effective brute-force space is bounded to approximately 900 candidates per second per (submission, form) pair, making exploitation practical without any prior authentication or account.
• CVE-2026-16843 • published on July 31, 2026 Some Hikvision Wireless Access Points are vulnerable to authenticated command execution due to insufficient input validation. Attackers with valid credentials can exploit this flaw by sending crafted packets containing malicious commands to affected devices, leading to arbitrary command execution.
• CVE-2026-16843 • published on July 31, 2026 Some Hikvision Wireless Access Points are vulnerable to authenticated command execution due to insufficient input validation. Attackers with valid credentials can exploit this flaw by sending crafted packets containing malicious commands to affected devices, leading to arbitrary command execution.
• CVE-2026-16843 • published on July 31, 2026 Some Hikvision Wireless Access Points are vulnerable to authenticated command execution due to insufficient input validation. Attackers with valid credentials can exploit this flaw by sending crafted packets containing malicious commands to affected devices, leading to arbitrary command execution.
• CVE-2026-16843 • published on July 31, 2026 Some Hikvision Networking Products are vulnerable to authenticated command execution due to insufficient input validation. Attackers with valid credentials can exploit this flaw by sending crafted packets containing malicious commands to affected devices, leading to arbitrary command execution.
• CVE-2026-11770 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject LDAP search filters into the CleanAllRUV replication status-check extended operation. Because the handler performs the search against cn=config with elevated replication plugin privileges and returns a boolean match result, the attacker can extract sensitive server configuration metadata, including replication bind DNs and password storage scheme information.
• CVE-2026-11770 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject LDAP search filters into the CleanAllRUV replication status-check extended operation. Because the handler performs the search against cn=config with elevated replication plugin privileges and returns a boolean match result, the attacker can extract sensitive server configuration metadata, including replication bind DNs and password storage scheme information.
• CVE-2026-11770 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject LDAP search filters into the CleanAllRUV replication status-check extended operation. Because the handler performs the search against cn=config with elevated replication plugin privileges and returns a boolean match result, the attacker can extract sensitive server configuration metadata, including replication bind DNs and password storage scheme information.
• CVE-2026-11770 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. An unauthenticated remote attacker can inject LDAP search filters into the CleanAllRUV replication status-check extended operation. Because the handler performs the search against cn=config with elevated replication plugin privileges and returns a boolean match result, the attacker can extract sensitive server configuration metadata, including replication bind DNs and password storage scheme information.
• CVE-2026-15722 • published on July 31, 2026 A stack buffer overflow flaw was found in 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). The get_ruvelement_from_berval() function in repl5_ruv.c copies digit characters from a network-supplied RUV berval into a fixed 16-byte stack buffer without bounds checking. A remote unauthenticated attacker can crash the LDAP server by sending a crafted StartNSDS50ReplicationRequest extended operation containing a replica ID field with more than 16 digit characters. The overflow occurs during payload decoding, before any authorization check. Stack protectors limit impact to denial of service.
• CVE-2026-15722 • published on July 31, 2026 A stack buffer overflow flaw was found in 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). The get_ruvelement_from_berval() function in repl5_ruv.c copies digit characters from a network-supplied RUV berval into a fixed 16-byte stack buffer without bounds checking. A remote unauthenticated attacker can crash the LDAP server by sending a crafted StartNSDS50ReplicationRequest extended operation containing a replica ID field with more than 16 digit characters. The overflow occurs during payload decoding, before any authorization check. Stack protectors limit impact to denial of service.
• CVE-2026-15722 • published on July 31, 2026 A stack buffer overflow flaw was found in 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). The get_ruvelement_from_berval() function in repl5_ruv.c copies digit characters from a network-supplied RUV berval into a fixed 16-byte stack buffer without bounds checking. A remote unauthenticated attacker can crash the LDAP server by sending a crafted StartNSDS50ReplicationRequest extended operation containing a replica ID field with more than 16 digit characters. The overflow occurs during payload decoding, before any authorization check. Stack protectors limit impact to denial of service.
• CVE-2026-15722 • published on July 31, 2026 A stack buffer overflow flaw was found in 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). The get_ruvelement_from_berval() function in repl5_ruv.c copies digit characters from a network-supplied RUV berval into a fixed 16-byte stack buffer without bounds checking. A remote unauthenticated attacker can crash the LDAP server by sending a crafted StartNSDS50ReplicationRequest extended operation containing a replica ID field with more than 16 digit characters. The overflow occurs during payload decoding, before any authorization check. Stack protectors limit impact to denial of service.
• CVE-2026-10079 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes (RHACS). When processing Kubernetes Deployments, ACS replaces deployment identity metadata based on the openshift.io/encoded-deployment-config label. A user with permission to create Deployments can set this label to "null", causing ACS to treat the workload as having empty UID, name and labels and namespace "default". This bypasses deploy-time policy detection and enforcement visibility, prevents correct persistence in Central and breaks violation reporting and compliance correlation for the affected deployment.
• CVE-2026-10079 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes (RHACS). When processing Kubernetes Deployments, ACS replaces deployment identity metadata based on the openshift.io/encoded-deployment-config label. A user with permission to create Deployments can set this label to "null", causing ACS to treat the workload as having empty UID, name and labels and namespace "default". This bypasses deploy-time policy detection and enforcement visibility, prevents correct persistence in Central and breaks violation reporting and compliance correlation for the affected deployment.
• CVE-2026-10079 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes (RHACS). When processing Kubernetes Deployments, ACS replaces deployment identity metadata based on the openshift.io/encoded-deployment-config label. A user with permission to create Deployments can set this label to "null", causing ACS to treat the workload as having empty UID, name and labels and namespace "default". This bypasses deploy-time policy detection and enforcement visibility, prevents correct persistence in Central and breaks violation reporting and compliance correlation for the affected deployment.
• CVE-2026-10079 • published on July 31, 2026 A flaw was found in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes (RHACS). When processing Kubernetes Deployments, ACS replaces deployment identity metadata based on the openshift.io/encoded-deployment-config label. A user with permission to create Deployments can set this label to "null", causing ACS to treat the workload as having empty UID, name and labels and namespace "default". This bypasses deploy-time policy detection and enforcement visibility, prevents correct persistence in Central and breaks violation reporting and compliance correlation for the affected deployment.
• CVE-2026-18436 • published on July 31, 2026 The MailPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access in versions up to, and including, 1.5.0 via the campaign revision-restore REST endpoint (POST /wp-json/mailpress/v1/campaign/id/restore-revision/). The route in the vulnerable range was registered without a permissionCallback, allowing the restoreRevision() handler to run for unauthenticated requests and overwrite a campaign's content_html with any prior revision. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify campaign content by restoring an arbitrary revision.