| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel OAuth component.
This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.11.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1.
The authorization code callback did not carry a state parameter binding it to the authorization request that started the flow, and the callback did not verify one. An authorization code obtained in any browser could therefore be redeemed at the callback and associated with whichever session presented it, which is login cross-site request forgery: a victim can be silently signed in as an identity the attacker controls, so that actions the victim then performs, and data they then submit, land in the attacker's account. The same unvalidated callback handling also allowed the post-authentication redirect target to be influenced, giving an open redirect from a trusted origin. The state check runs before the authorization code is redeemed, so these paths are reachable without any interaction with the identity provider.
Upgrade to Apache Camel 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. Users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.18.5. Users on the 4.22.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.22.1. The authorization request now issues a state value bound to the session, and the callback rejects a request whose state is absent or does not match, stopping the route with a 400 response. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, terminate the authorization code flow in a component that performs its own state binding rather than relying on the Camel callback. Note that after upgrading, a deployment behind a proxy that drops or rewrites the callback query string will begin to see 400 responses, because the state parameter must survive the round trip. |
| Gitify before 7.10.0 contains a login cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to bind a victim's client to their account because performGitHubWebOAuth() omits OAuth state validation. Attackers can get a gitify://oauth?code= link with their own authorization code opened during a victim's pending login, causing Gitify to display attacker-controlled notifications as the victim's own. |
| Distribution is a toolkit to pack, ship, store, and deliver container content. Prior to 3.1.2, registry/client.(*manifests).Get() reads a manifest returned for a digest-pinned request and passes it to distribution.UnmarshalManifest without hashing the body against the requested digest, allowing a malicious or intercepted registry response to substitute attacker-chosen manifest content even when Docker-Content-Digest claims the requested value. The bundled pull-through proxy in registry/proxy/proxymanifeststore.go can cache and re-serve the substituted manifest. This issue is fixed in version 3.1.2. |
| Traccar 5.7 through 6.16.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to log victims into attacker-controlled accounts because the OpenID Connect callback never validates the OAuth state parameter. Attackers can induce a victim's browser to load /api/session/openid/callback with their own authorization code, causing data the victim enters, such as registered devices, to land in the attacker's account. |
| OpenRefine through 3.10.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the get-rows command that allows remote attackers to execute Jython facet expressions. Attackers can lure a user to a malicious page issuing a cross-origin GET with a crafted engine parameter, executing operating system commands as the OpenRefine user. |
| Python Social Auth is a social authentication/registration mechanism. Prior to 5.0.2, the LINE backend exchanges an authorization code without validating the returned OAuth state. An attacker can begin authorization for an attacker-controlled LINE account and induce a victim to visit the resulting callback URL, causing the application to log the victim into the attacker's account. When account linking is enabled, the same missing validation can link the attacker's LINE identity to the victim's existing account and create a persistent unauthorized login path. Only applications with the LINE backend enabled are affected. This issue is fixed in version 5.0.2. |
| In Eclipse Jetty, across various versions of `jetty-security`, and `jetty-eeN-security`, and `jetty-eeN-servlet`, the Jakarta Spec constraints defined as `http-method-omission` can be bypassed by using substrings of the defined HTTP Methods. |
| Exposure of private personal information to an unauthorized actor in Azure Active Directory allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information locally. |
| XXL-JOB 3.5.0-SNAPSHOT and earlier contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the user management controller (JobUserController). The endpoints /user/insert, /user/update, and /user/delete lack CSRF protection and do not restrict HTTP method. |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
iommu/vt-d: Force requesting ACS when tboot is enabled
Currently the conditions of requesting ACS in detect_intel_iommu()
don't include tboot, leading to a possible misconfiguration with ACS
disabled (e.g. due to user opts) while iommu is later forced on by
tboot_force_iommu().
Fix it by checking tboot in detect_intel_iommu(). |
| Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in AuthTake Technology Inc. Authtake allows Encryption Brute Forcing.
This issue affects authtake: from v1.3 before v1.4. |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Tighten cgroup storage cookie checks for prog arrays
The fix in commit abad3d0bad72 ("bpf: Fix oob access in cgroup local
storage") is still incomplete. The prog-array compatibility check
treats a program with no cgroup storage as compatible with any stored
storage cookie. This allows a storage-less program to bridge a tail
call chain between an entry program and a storage-using callee even
though cgroup local storage at runtime still follows the caller's
context, that is, A -> B(no storage) -> C(storage) path.
Requiring exact cookie equality would break the legitimate case of a
storage-less leaf program being tail called from a storage-using one.
Instead, only accept a zero storage cookie if the program cannot
perform tail calls itself. This keeps A -> B(no storage) working
while rejecting the A -> B(no storage) -> C(storage) bridge. |
| Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value vulnerability in hexpm hex allows a package mirror to substitute the tarball that mix hex.package fetch PACKAGE VERSION --output - writes to standard output.
Hex compares a fetched tarball's inner and outer checksums with the repository's signed registry before writing it to a file or unpacking it. The standard output branch of mix hex.package fetch writes the bytes returned by Hex.SCM.fetch/3 without that comparison, and Hex.SCM.fetch/3 doesn't verify freshly downloaded tarballs itself. When a mirror configured with HEX_MIRROR_URL or mirror_url serves altered bytes, the command prints them and exits successfully, while the same fetch with --output FILE fails with a checksum mismatch.
Hex also prints diagnostics to standard output while the command runs: the body of a failed HTTP response from the update check or a registry fetch, and API warnings from the x-hex-message header. A mirror that answers one of those requests with an error whose body is a tar archive gets that archive written to standard output ahead of the verified tarball, so a pipeline that unpacks standard output extracts the mirror's files. This happens even when the checksum check then fails, because the archive is already on standard output.
This issue affects hex: from 0.20.2 before 2.5.2. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in aThemeArt aThemeArt Theme Helper athemeart-theme-helper allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects aThemeArt Theme Helper: from n/a through 1.0.8. |
| The Innovs HR WordPress plugin before 1.0.3.7.1 does not have CSRF checks in some places, which could allow attackers to make logged in users perform unwanted actions via CSRF attacks such as adding them as employees. |
| Several administrative actions do not sufficiently validate whether a request was intentionally initiated by the authenticated user. In particular, the DBUpdateLogCleanUp action can be triggered through a GET request without validating a ChallengeToken. An unauthenticated remote attacker can therefore cause the browser of an authenticated administrator to execute the cleanup action by embedding a crafted request in a malicious web page. Successful exploitation can delete existing DBUpdate log entries. This may reduce the availability of diagnostic and historical information used for troubleshooting and auditing. The impact is limited to DBUpdate log entries that exist at the time the forged request is processed.
Additional administrative endpoints were identified that do not validate a ChallengeToken. Some of these endpoints can trigger administrative actions such as deploying or synchronizing already existing configuration. They do not allow an attacker to introduce arbitrary new configuration through the CSRF request itself.
Export and read-only endpoints were also identified without ChallengeToken validation. While these endpoints may be triggered through a forged cross-site request, the response content remains subject to the browser's same-origin restrictions and is not automatically exposed to the attacker. Therefore, no direct confidentiality impact has been demonstrated for these endpoints.
This issue affects OTRS:
* 7.0.X
* 8.0.X
* 2023.X
* 2024.X
* 2025.X
* 2026.X before 2026.7.X
Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected |
| In nltk version 3.9.4, the `nltk.downloader.Downloader._download_package()` function writes downloaded package bytes to disk and may extract them before enforcing SHA-256 or MD5 checksum validation. This allows an attacker to tamper with the package response body for `info.url` through a compromised mirror, malicious proxy, or other source-substitution condition, leading to the installation of attacker-controlled package bytes. The vulnerability can result in malicious corpus or model content being trusted by downstream users or applications. |
| An authenticated administrator can be induced to delete administrative Import/Export templates through a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attack. The OTRS AdminImportExport::TemplateDelete action does not validate the request's ChallengeToken, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to craft a malicious request that is executed with the privileges of an active administrator session.
This issue affects OTRS:
* 7.0.X
* 8.0.X
* 2023.X
* 2024.X
* 2025.X
* 2026.X before 2026.7.X
Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected |
| FasterXML jackson-databind 2.x before 2.9.7 might allow remote attackers to conduct server-side request forgery (SSRF) attacks by leveraging failure to block the axis2-jaxws class from polymorphic deserialization. |
| Previously, a user operating inside of a malicious Go project that defines a bogus golang.org/toolchain go.sum entry and operates a malicious GOMODPROXY the user chooses to use can bypass the intended checksum. We now ensure that golang.org/toolchain always goes to the network for the canonical checksum. |
