Export limit exceeded: 364869 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (364869 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-3179 | 1 Wpexperts | 1 Post Smtp | 2025-06-04 | 8.8 High |
| The POST SMTP Mailer WordPress plugin before 2.5.7 does not have proper CSRF checks in some AJAX actions, which could allow attackers to make logged in users with the manage_postman_smtp capability resend an email to an arbitrary address (for example a password reset email could be resent to an attacker controlled email, and allow them to take over an account). | ||||
| CVE-2023-52233 | 1 Wpexperts | 1 Post Smtp | 2025-06-04 | 8.6 High |
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in Post SMTP Post SMTP Mailer/Email Log.This issue affects Post SMTP Mailer/Email Log: from n/a through 2.8.6. | ||||
| CVE-2022-29492 | 1 Hitachienergy | 2 Microscada X Sys600, Sys600 | 2025-06-04 | 5.3 Medium |
| Improper Input Validation vulnerability in the handling of a malformed IEC 104 TCP packet in the Hitachi Energy MicroSCADA X SYS600, MicroSCADA Pro SYS600. Upon receiving a malformed IEC 104 TCP packet, the malformed packet is dropped, however the TCP connection is left open. This may cause a denial-of-service if the affected connection is left open. This issue affects: Hitachi Energy MicroSCADA Pro SYS600 version 9.4 FP2 Hotfix 4 and earlier versions Hitachi Energy MicroSCADA X SYS600 version 10 to version 10.3.1. cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_pro_sys600:9.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_pro_sys600:9.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_pro_sys600:9.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_pro_sys600:9.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_pro_sys600:9.4:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.1.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.2.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:a:hitachienergy:microscada_x_sys600:10.3.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | ||||
| CVE-2024-54020 | 1 Fortinet | 1 Fortimanager | 2025-06-04 | 2.1 Low |
| A missing authorization in Fortinet FortiManager versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, and versions 7.0.0 through 7.0.7 may allow an authenticated attacker to overwrite global threat feeds via crafted update requests. | ||||
| CVE-2025-48485 | 1 Freescout | 1 Freescout | 2025-06-04 | 5.4 Medium |
| FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Prior to version 1.8.180, the application is vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks due to incorrect input validation and sanitization of user-input data when an authenticated user updates the profile of an arbitrary customer. This issue has been patched in version 1.8.180. | ||||
| CVE-2025-5371 | 1 Razormist | 1 Health Center Patient Record Management System | 2025-06-04 | 7.3 High |
| A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in SourceCodester Health Center Patient Record Management System 1.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /admin/admin.php. The manipulation of the argument Username leads to sql injection. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. | ||||
| CVE-2021-26423 | 2 Microsoft, Redhat | 7 .net, .net Core, Powershell Core and 4 more | 2025-06-04 | 7.5 High |
| .NET Core and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability | ||||
| CVE-2024-56655 | 1 Linux | 1 Linux Kernel | 2025-06-04 | 5.5 Medium |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_tables: do not defer rule destruction via call_rcu nf_tables_chain_destroy can sleep, it can't be used from call_rcu callbacks. Moreover, nf_tables_rule_release() is only safe for error unwinding, while transaction mutex is held and the to-be-desroyed rule was not exposed to either dataplane or dumps, as it deactives+frees without the required synchronize_rcu() in-between. nft_rule_expr_deactivate() callbacks will change ->use counters of other chains/sets, see e.g. nft_lookup .deactivate callback, these must be serialized via transaction mutex. Also add a few lockdep asserts to make this more explicit. Calling synchronize_rcu() isn't ideal, but fixing this without is hard and way more intrusive. As-is, we can get: WARNING: .. net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c:5515 nft_set_destroy+0x.. Workqueue: events nf_tables_trans_destroy_work RIP: 0010:nft_set_destroy+0x3fe/0x5c0 Call Trace: <TASK> nf_tables_trans_destroy_work+0x6b7/0xad0 process_one_work+0x64a/0xce0 worker_thread+0x613/0x10d0 In case the synchronize_rcu becomes an issue, we can explore alternatives. One way would be to allocate nft_trans_rule objects + one nft_trans_chain object, deactivate the rules + the chain and then defer the freeing to the nft destroy workqueue. We'd still need to keep the synchronize_rcu path as a fallback to handle -ENOMEM corner cases though. | ||||
| CVE-2025-37782 | 2025-06-04 | 5.5 Medium | ||
| This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | ||||
| CVE-2025-37832 | 2025-06-04 | 7.0 High | ||
| This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | ||||
| CVE-2023-2454 | 3 Fedoraproject, Postgresql, Redhat | 9 Fedora, Postgresql, Enterprise Linux and 6 more | 2025-06-04 | 7.2 High |
| schema_element defeats protective search_path changes; It was found that certain database calls in PostgreSQL could permit an authed attacker with elevated database-level privileges to execute arbitrary code. | ||||
| CVE-2025-49210 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49209 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49208 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49207 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49206 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49205 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49204 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49203 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||
| CVE-2025-49202 | 2025-06-04 | N/A | ||
| Not used | ||||