Export limit exceeded: 10628 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 10305 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (10305 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-34050 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the web interface of AVTECH IP camera, DVR, and NVR devices. An attacker can craft malicious requests that, when executed in the context of an authenticated user’s browser session, allow unauthorized changes to the device configuration without user interaction. | ||||
| CVE-2025-31328 | 2026-04-15 | 4.6 Medium | ||
| SAP Learning Solution is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), allowing an attacker to trick authenticated user into sending unintended requests to the server. GET-based OData function is named in a way that it violates the expected behaviour. This issue could impact both the confidentiality and integrity of the application without affecting the availability. | ||||
| CVE-2025-32086 | 1 Intel | 3 Processors, Xeon, Xeon Processors | 2026-04-15 | 7.2 High |
| Improperly implemented security check for standard in the DDRIO configuration for some Intel(R) Xeon(R) 6 Processors when using Intel(R) SGX or Intel(R) TDX may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4344 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| The Shield Security – Smart Bot Blocking & Intrusion Prevention Security plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 19.1.13. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the exec function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to disable pin protection for the admin interface of the plugin via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-43930 | 2 Eyecix, Wordpress | 2 Jobsearch, Wordpress | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in eyecix JobSearch allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects JobSearch: from n/a through 2.5.3. | ||||
| CVE-2024-47211 | 1 Redhat | 2 Openshift, Openstack | 2026-04-15 | 5.3 Medium |
| In OpenStack Ironic before 21.4.4, 22.x and 23.x before 23.0.3, 23.x and 24.x before 24.1.3, and 25.x and 26.x before 26.1.0, there is a lack of checksum validation of supplied image_source URLs when configured to convert images to a raw format for streaming. | ||||
| CVE-2024-45504 | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium | ||
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in multiple Alps System Integration products and the OEM products allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to hijack the authentication of the user and to perform unintended operations if the user views a malicious page while logged in. | ||||
| CVE-2020-10095 | 2026-04-15 | 8.1 High | ||
| Various Lexmark devices have CSRF that allows an attacker to modify the configuration of the device. | ||||
| CVE-2024-48930 | 1 Secp256k1-node Project | 1 Secp256k1-node | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| secp256k1-node is a Node.js binding for an Optimized C library for EC operations on curve secp256k1. In `elliptic`-based version, `loadUncompressedPublicKey` has a check that the public key is on the curve. Prior to versions 5.0.1, 4.0.4, and 3.8.1, however, `loadCompressedPublicKey` is missing that check. That allows the attacker to use public keys on low-cardinality curves to extract enough information to fully restore the private key from as little as 11 ECDH sessions, and very cheaply on compute power. Other operations on public keys are also affected, including e.g. `publicKeyVerify()` incorrectly returning `true` on those invalid keys, and e.g. `publicKeyTweakMul()` also returning predictable outcomes allowing to restore the tweak. Versions 5.0.1, 4.0.4, and 3.8.1 contain a fix for the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2024-47100 | 2026-04-15 | 7.1 High | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1211C AC/DC/Rly (6ES7211-1BE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1211C DC/DC/DC (6ES7211-1AE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1211C DC/DC/Rly (6ES7211-1HE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1212C AC/DC/Rly (6ES7212-1BE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1212C DC/DC/DC (6ES7212-1AE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1212C DC/DC/Rly (6ES7212-1HE40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1212FC DC/DC/DC (6ES7212-1AF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1212FC DC/DC/Rly (6ES7212-1HF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1214C AC/DC/Rly (6ES7214-1BG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1214C DC/DC/DC (6ES7214-1AG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1214C DC/DC/Rly (6ES7214-1HG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1214FC DC/DC/DC (6ES7214-1AF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1214FC DC/DC/Rly (6ES7214-1HF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1215C AC/DC/Rly (6ES7215-1BG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1215C DC/DC/DC (6ES7215-1AG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1215C DC/DC/Rly (6ES7215-1HG40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1215FC DC/DC/DC (6ES7215-1AF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1215FC DC/DC/Rly (6ES7215-1HF40-0XB0), SIMATIC S7-1200 CPU 1217C DC/DC/DC (6ES7217-1AG40-0XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1212-1BE40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1212-1BE40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1212-1HE40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1212-1HE40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212C DC/DC/DC (6AG1212-1AE40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212C DC/DC/DC (6AG1212-1AE40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1212C DC/DC/DC RAIL (6AG2212-1AE40-1XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1BG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1BG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1BG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/DC (6AG1214-1AG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/DC (6AG1214-1AG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/DC (6AG1214-1AG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1HG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1HG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1HG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214C DC/DC/DC RAIL (6AG2214-1AG40-1XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214FC DC/DC/DC (6AG1214-1AF40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1214FC DC/DC/RLY (6AG1214-1HF40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1BG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1BG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 AC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1BG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 DC/DC/DC (6AG1215-1AG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 DC/DC/DC (6AG1215-1AG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1HG40-2XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1HG40-4XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215 DC/DC/RLY (6AG1215-1HG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215C DC/DC/DC (6AG1215-1AG40-5XB0), SIPLUS S7-1200 CPU 1215FC DC/DC/DC (6AG1215-1AF40-5XB0). The web interface of the affected devices is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks. This could allow an unauthenticated attacker to change the CPU mode by tricking a legitimate and authenticated user with sufficient permissions on the target CPU to click on a malicious link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4541 | 1 Wordpress | 1 Wordpress | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium |
| The Custom Product List Table plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.0.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when modifying products. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to add, delete, bulk edit, approve or cancel products via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4463 | 1 Wordpress | 1 Wordpress | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium |
| The Squelch Tabs and Accordions Shortcodes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 0.4.7. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving plugin settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify plugin settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4218 | 1 Wordpress | 1 Wordpress | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| The AffiEasy plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.6. This is due to plugin improperly releasing the tagged and patched version of the plugin - the vulnerable version is used as the core files, while the patched version was included in a 'trunk' folder. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to perform a variety of actions via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-4204 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| The Bulk Posts Editing For WordPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.2.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the plugin's AJAX actions.. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to create and duplicate posts, retrieve post content, and modify post taxonomy among other things via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. | ||||
| CVE-2024-40685 | 1 Ibm | 1 Operations Analytics - Log Analysis | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium |
| IBM Operations Analytics – Log Analysis versions 1.3.5.0 through 1.3.8.3 and IBM SmartCloud Analytics – Log Analysis are vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability that could allow an attacker to trick a trusted user into performing unauthorized actions. | ||||
| CVE-2024-37251 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WPENGINE, INC. Advanced Custom Fields PRO.This issue affects Advanced Custom Fields PRO: from n/a before 6.3.2. | ||||
| CVE-2024-35638 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in JumpDEMAND Inc. ActiveDEMAND.This issue affects ActiveDEMAND: from n/a through 0.2.43. | ||||
| CVE-2024-51144 | 1 Ampache | 1 Ampache | 2026-04-15 | 8.8 High |
| Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the 'pvmsg.php?action=add_message', pvmsg.php?action=confirm_delete , and ajax.server.php?page=user&action=flip_follow endpoints in Ampache <= 6.6.0. | ||||
| CVE-2024-34755 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in CRM Perks Integration for Contact Form 7 and Salesforce.This issue affects Integration for Contact Form 7 and Salesforce: from n/a through 1.3.9. | ||||
| CVE-2024-34714 | 2026-04-15 | 7.6 High | ||
| The Hoppscotch Browser Extension is a browser extension for Hoppscotch, a community-driven end-to-end open-source API development ecosystem. Due to an oversight during a change made to the extension in the commit d4e8e4830326f46ba17acd1307977ecd32a85b58, a critical check for the origin list was missed and allowed for messages to be sent to the extension which the extension gladly processed and responded back with the results of, while this wasn't supposed to happen and be blocked by the origin not being present in the origin list. This vulnerability exposes Hoppscotch Extension users to sites which call into Hoppscotch Extension APIs internally. This fundamentally allows any site running on the browser with the extension installed to bypass CORS restrictions if the user is running extensions with the given version. This security hole was patched in the commit 7e364b928ab722dc682d0fcad713a96cc38477d6 which was released along with the extension version `0.35`. As a workaround, Chrome users can use the Extensions Settings to disable the extension access to only the origins that you want. Firefox doesn't have an alternative to upgrading to a fixed version. | ||||