| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| StudioCMS is a server-side-rendered, Astro native, headless content management system. Prior to 0.4.0, the /studiocms_api/dashboard/api-tokens endpoint allows any authenticated user (at least Editor) to generate API tokens for any other user, including owner and admin accounts. The endpoint fails to validate whether the requesting user is authorized to create tokens on behalf of the target user ID, resulting in a full privilege escalation. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.4.0. |
| StudioCMS is a server-side-rendered, Astro native, headless content management system. Prior to 0.4.0, the DELETE /studiocms_api/dashboard/api-tokens endpoint allows any authenticated user with editor privileges or above to revoke API tokens belonging to any other user, including admin and owner accounts. The handler accepts tokenID and userID directly from the request payload without verifying token ownership, caller identity, or role hierarchy. This enables targeted denial of service against critical integrations and automations. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.4.0. |
| Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in pdfmake versions 0.3.0-beta.2 through 0.3.5 allows a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information via the src/URLResolver.js component. The fix was released in version 0.3.6 which introduces the setUrlAccessPolicy() method allowing server operators to define URL access rules. A warning is now logged when pdfmake is used server-side without a policy configured. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SICAM SIAPP SDK (All versions < V2.1.7). The affected application builds shell commands with caller-provided strings and executes them. An attacker could influence the executed command, potentially resulting in command injection and full system compromise. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SICAM SIAPP SDK (All versions < V2.1.7). The affected application performs file deletion without properly validating the file path or target. An attacker could delete files or sockets that the affected process has permission to remove, potentially resulting in denial of service or service disruption. |
| This issue affects the
ExtractEmbeddedFiles example in Apache PDFBox: from 2.0.24 through 2.0.35, from 3.0.0 through 3.0.6.
The ExtractEmbeddedFiles example contains a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) because
the filename that is obtained from
PDComplexFileSpecification.getFilename() is appended to the extraction path.
Users who have copied this example into their production code should
review it to ensure that the extraction path is acceptable. The example
has been changed accordingly, now the initial path and the extraction
paths are converted into canonical paths and it is verified that
extraction path contains the initial path. The documentation has also
been adjusted. |
| A UNIX symbolic link (Symlink) following vulnerability in Fortinet FortiClientLinux 7.4.0 through 7.4.4, FortiClientLinux 7.2.2 through 7.2.12 may allow a local and unprivileged user to escalate their privileges to root. |
| OneUptime is a solution for monitoring and managing online services. Prior to 10.0.21, OneUptime Synthetic Monitors allow a low-privileged authenticated project user to execute arbitrary commands on the oneuptime-probe server/container. The root cause is that untrusted Synthetic Monitor code is executed inside Node's vm while live host-realm Playwright browser and page objects are exposed to it. A malicious user can call Playwright APIs on the injected browser object and cause the probe to spawn an attacker-controlled executable. This is a server-side remote code execution issue. It does not require a separate vm sandbox escape. This vulnerability is fixed in 10.0.21. |
| Improper buffer restrictions in some UEFI firmware for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data manipulation. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (none), integrity (high) and availability (low) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Exposure of resource to wrong sphere in the UEFI PdaSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an information disclosure. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| The Appointment Booking Calendar — Simply Schedule Appointments Booking Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to blind SQL Injection in all versions up to, and including, 1.6.9.27. This is due to the `db_where_conditions` method in the `TD_DB_Model` class failing to prevent the `append_where_sql` parameter from being passed through JSON request bodies, while only checking for its presence in the `$_REQUEST` superglobal. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append arbitrary SQL commands to queries and extract sensitive information from the database via the `append_where_sql` parameter in JSON payloads granted they have obtained a valid `public_token` that is inadvertently exposed during the booking flow. |
| The ExactMetrics – Google Analytics Dashboard for WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in versions 8.6.0 through 9.0.2. This is due to the `store_settings()` method in the `ExactMetrics_Onboarding` class accepting a user-supplied `triggered_by` parameter that is used instead of the current user's ID to check permissions. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers with the `exactmetrics_save_settings` capability to bypass the `install_plugins` capability check by specifying an administrator's user ID in the `triggered_by` parameter, allowing them to install arbitrary plugins and achieve Remote Code Execution. This vulnerability only affects sites on which administrator has given other user types the permission to view reports and can only be exploited by users of that type. |
| The ExactMetrics – Google Analytics Dashboard for WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Improper Privilege Management in versions 7.1.0 through 9.0.2. This is due to the `update_settings()` function accepting arbitrary plugin setting names without a whitelist of allowed settings. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers with the `exactmetrics_save_settings` capability to modify any plugin setting, including the `save_settings` option that controls which user roles have access to plugin functionality. The admin intended to delegate configuration access to a trusted user, not enable that user to delegate access to everyone. By setting `save_settings` to include `subscriber`, an attacker can grant plugin administrative access to all subscribers on the site. |
| The Happy Addons for Elementor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 3.21.0 via the `ha_duplicate_thing` admin action handler. This is due to the `can_clone()` method only checking `current_user_can('edit_posts')` (a general capability) without performing object-level authorization such as `current_user_can('edit_post', $post_id)`, and the nonce being tied to the generic action name `ha_duplicate_thing` rather than to a specific post ID. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to clone any published post, page, or custom post type by obtaining a valid clone nonce from their own posts and changing the `post_id` parameter to target other users' content. The clone operation copies the full post content, all post metadata (including potentially sensitive widget configurations and API tokens), and taxonomies into a new draft owned by the attacker. |
| The Happy Addons for Elementor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 3.21.0 via the `ha_condition_update` AJAX action. This is due to the `validate_reqeust()` method using `current_user_can('edit_posts', $template_id)` instead of `current_user_can('edit_post', $template_id)` — failing to perform object-level authorization. Additionally, the `ha_get_current_condition` AJAX action lacks a capability check. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to modify the display conditions of any published `ha_library` template. Because the `cond_to_html()` renderer outputs condition values into HTML attributes without proper escaping (using string concatenation instead of `esc_attr()`), an attacker can inject event handler attributes (e.g., `onmouseover`) that execute JavaScript when an administrator views the Template Conditions panel, resulting in Stored Cross-Site Scripting. |
| The Name Directory plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'name_directory_name' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.32.1 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. The vulnerability was partially patched in versions 1.30.3 and 1.32.1. |
| The Checkout Field Editor (Checkout Manager) for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via custom radio and checkboxgroup field values submitted through the WooCommerce Block Checkout Store API in all versions up to, and including, 2.1.7. This is due to the `prepare_single_field_data()` method in `class-thwcfd-block-order-data.php` first escaping values with `esc_html()` then immediately reversing the escaping with `html_entity_decode()` for radio and checkboxgroup field types, combined with a permissive `wp_kses()` allowlist in `get_allowed_html()` that explicitly permits the `<select>` element with the `onchange` event handler attribute. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts via the Store API checkout endpoint that execute when an administrator views the order details page. |
| The Modular DS: Monitor, update, and backup multiple websites plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.5.1. This is due to missing nonce validation on the postConfirmOauth() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to disconnect the plugin's OAuth/SSO connection via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Improper input validation in the UEFI FlashUcAcmSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable local code execution. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) impacts. |
| Time-of-check time-of-use race condition in the UEFI PdaSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an information disclosure. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
