| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, validation of an MLS (RFC 9420) external commit's proposal list, org.bouncycastle.mls.protocol.Group.validateExternalCachedProposals, counted the proposals by type and bounded the removed leaf index but never established that the removed leaf had anything to do with the joiner. RFC 9420 sec. 12.2 permits at most one Remove proposal in an external commit, with which the joiner removes an old version of themselves, and requires that where one is present the LeafNode in the commit's path field meet the criteria it would have to meet in an Update for the removed leaf, in particular that its credential present identifiers acceptable for the removed participant. The ordinary proposal-list validator's self-remove rule is deliberately not applied on this path, because a resync commit legitimately removes a leaf the joiner owns, but nothing was put in its place. Any party holding the group's public GroupInfo, which is precisely what an external joiner is meant to be given, could therefore commit a Remove naming any member's LeafIndex and have every member apply it, evicting that member and taking over their slot in the ratchet tree. The credential check that should have prevented this existed only in the gRPC interop harness and so protected no other caller of the public Group.externalJoin and Group.handle API. An external commit carrying a Remove is now accepted only when the removed leaf's credential is identical to the one in the joiner's own new leaf, on both the sending and the receiving side. |
| In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP certificate API accepted a third-party certification or trust delegation from any component key of the issuing certificate, without requiring that component to have been granted the authority to certify. OpenPGPCertificate.getCertificationBy() and getDelegationBy() resolve a third-party signature by matching its issuer key identifier against every key of the third-party certificate, then verify the issuing component's binding chain and the signature itself; nothing checked that the issuing component carried the RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29 certification key flag (CERTIFY_OTHER) when the signature was created. A subkey bound only with SIGN_DATA - the online signing subkey of exactly the offline-primary arrangement those key flags exist to express - could therefore issue a positive User ID certification over an attacker-controlled identity, or a full-trust depth-one direct-key delegation of introducer trust, and the API returned it as a valid signature chain attributed to the third-party certificate. An application treating getCertificationBy(...).isValid() or getDelegationBy(...) as an identity or trusted-introducer decision would attribute the attacker's assertion to the offline primary key. The same held for a legacy RSA subkey bound only for encryption, whose algorithm is nonetheless able to sign. This does not forge the primary key's signature or recover any private key; it promotes an already-compromised restricted subkey to the primary key's identity-issuing authority, defeating the containment the key-flag separation provides. A third-party certification or delegation is now attributed to the issuing certificate only when the component key that made it is the primary key, or is a subkey holding CERTIFY_OTHER when the signature was created, so certification-capable subkeys continue to be accepted; primary keys are accepted whatever their key flags say, since a primary key is certification-capable by construction and certificates carrying no key flags subpacket at all are common. Third-party revocations are deliberately outside the rule, since declining to honour one would keep trust alive rather than withdraw it. |
| The WPCafe – Restaurant Menu, Online Food Ordering & Table Booking System plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 3.0.19. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to read, create, update, clone, and delete email notification flows, including overwriting the default reservation confirmation, cancellation, and admin alert emails with attacker-controlled content sent from the site's legitimate address, or destroying reservation notification flows entirely. The vulnerable endpoints are active by default on every WPCafe installation without any configuration requirement, as the Email_Automation_Service_Provider::is_enable() method unconditionally returns true and the plugin ships with five pre-configured default email flows upon activation. |
| The Nelio Content – Editorial Calendar & Social Media Auto-Posting plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.0 This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to permanently delete any reusable social message (nc_reusable_social post), including those authored by administrators or other privileged users. |
| The Photo Reviews for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Arbitrary Content Deletion in versions up to, and including, 1.2.30. This is due to the plugin storing attacker-controlled post IDs from the wcpr_image_upload_id parameter of a public review submission into the review's reviews-images comment meta without verifying that the IDs correspond to attachments owned by the submitter, combined with the delete_reviews_image() handler unconditionally calling wp_delete_post( $id, true ) on every stored ID when the review is deleted. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to permanently delete arbitrary posts, pages, products, or media attachments on the site whenever an administrator subsequently deletes the attacker's review (or when WordPress's built-in wp_scheduled_delete cron empties the comment trash after 30 days). |
| The Simple Membership plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data and sensitive information disclosure in versions up to, and including, 4.8.3 via the resend-activation and email-activation endpoints. The endpoints are dispatched from SwpmInitTimeTasks::check_and_do_email_activation() on frontend init with no authentication, nonce, capability, or ownership check, and the recipient address used by SwpmRegistration::send_reg_email() is taken from an attacker-controlled $_POST['email'] parameter (overriding the member's registered address). This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to redirect an arbitrary pending member's activation email — and the follow-up 'registration complete' email containing the member's username and plaintext password — to an attacker-chosen address, and to then activate that member's account without their consent. |
| The Alt Text AI – Automatically generate image alt text for SEO and accessibility plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.10.41. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to overwrite the post_content of any post or page on the site — including content they do not own — with LLM-generated text influenced by attacker-controlled keywords, enabling black-hat SEO manipulation and unauthorized consumption of the site owner's paid AltText.ai API credits. The nonce required to invoke the action is emitted on every admin page including /wp-admin/profile.php, which is accessible to Subscribers, making the nonce trivially obtainable by any authenticated user. |
| Formbricks before 5.4.4 and 6 before 6.0.1 allows stored XSS. The survey-level Custom Head Scripts feature did not enforce the documented Manage permission boundary. A workspace member holding only readWrite permission could configure Custom Head Scripts on a survey, an operation the documentation restricts to the Manage role. Because the configured scripts execute in the authenticated browser session of any user who opens the affected survey, a lower-privileged member can run arbitrary JavaScript (stored cross-site scripting) in the session of higher-privileged users. Fixed versions require Manage access to modify survey Custom Head Scripts. |
| The Ultimate Member – User Profile, Registration, Login, Member Directory, Content Restriction & Membership Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.13.1 This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to view privacy-restricted member profile field values — including fields explicitly configured as owner-only, members-only, or role-restricted — by querying the publicly accessible wp_ajax_nopriv_um_get_members endpoint. The nonce required by the endpoint ('um-frontend-nonce') is emitted to all unauthenticated visitors via wp_localize_script, meaning it provides no meaningful access control and any anonymous visitor can satisfy the endpoint's authentication requirements. |
| LangGraph Python SDK is used to connect to running LangGraph API servers, manage assistants, threads and stream runs from Python applications. From 0.1.45 until 0.4.4, the langgraph-sdk resource-scoped authorization decorators @auth.on.threads, @auth.on.assistants, and @auth.on.crons ignore the actions argument and register the selected handler for every action on the resource. Because that wildcard resource handler is selected before broader fallback handlers, an authenticated user may bypass fallback action, ownership, or permission checks and read, update, or delete another user's resource. Only Python deployments using actions on the affected decorators are vulnerable, and a deployment remains protected when the selected handler independently enforces all required checks for every action it receives. This issue is fixed in version 0.4.4. |
| A deployment mode intended to expose only read access to stored data proxies a set of application programming interface routes without restricting which request methods are allowed. One such route accepts a request that creates or overwrites a stored record, including an attacker-chosen identifier, using the application's own elevated backend credentials. This allows an authenticated user on a deployment intended to be read-only to forge or overwrite stored records that should not be modifiable in that deployment mode. |
| The application's role-authorization lookup defaults to granting access when a request handler's name is not present in its table of role requirements, rather than defaulting to deny. Any request handler that is not explicitly registered in this table is reachable by any authenticated user regardless of their assigned role, and any newly added handler is fail-open by default until explicitly added to the table. |
| In JetBrains YouTrack before 2026.2.18991 improper access control on Gantt chart allowed edits by users with view-only access |
| Malcolm is a network traffic analysis tool suite. Prior to version 26.07.0, role-based access control enforced in the Nginx OpenResty Lua layer evaluates the raw, unnormalized `ngx.var.request_uri`, while Nginx itself routes requests using the normalized path. An authenticated low-privilege user can prepend a traversal segment (for example `/x/../upload/...`) so that Nginx routes the request to a restricted backend while the Lua role check fails to match any rule and falls open, granting access it should deny. Version 26.07.0 fixes the issue. |
| In JetBrains YouTrack before 2026.2.18991 missing authorisation allowed users with read-only project access to overwrite project notification templates |
| A security flaw has been discovered in calcom cal.diy up to 6.2.0. This affects the function doesUserIdHaveAccessToBooking of the file BookingAccessService.ts of the component PBAC Permission Engine. Performing a manipulation results in missing authorization. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance. |
| UTMStack before 11.2.16 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in UTMIncidentCommandWebsocket.processCommand(), the handler mapped to the /command/{hostname} STOMP destination, where no role check or command allowlist is applied before forwarding supplied commands. Any authenticated user, regardless of role, can send arbitrary operating-system commands over gRPC to any connected agent, resulting in command execution on monitored endpoints where agent processes commonly run as root or SYSTEM. |
| Incorrect authorization in HID in Google Chrome prior to 154.0.8037.57 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass system access restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium) |
| Missing authorization in WebView in Google Chrome on on Android prior to 154.0.8037.57 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass web origin policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low) |
| Missing authorization in WakeLock in Google Chrome prior to 154.0.8037.57 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass system access restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low) |
