CVE & CISA-KEV Catalog

DataEase before 2.10.26 contains multiple access control defects in the sharing link module. Tickets are not bound to the target share UUID, so a valid ticket issued for one share can be reused against another (ShareTicketManage.validateTicket / POST /de2api/share/proxyInfo). The POST /de2api/share/validate endpoint issues a LinkToken after password verification without requiring a ticket, bypassing the 'ticket mandatory' policy. Additionally, the ticket create and delete endpoints (POST /de2api/ticket/saveTicket, POST /de2api/ticket/delTicket) lack share-ownership checks, allowing an authenticated user who knows another user's ticket to modify, rebind, or delete it (denial of service), and GET /de2api/share/queryRelationByUserId/{uid} allows authenticated users to enumerate other users' s

Published 2026-08-31

ToolJet before v3.16.208 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in TooljetDB controller endpoints that accept organizationId from URL path without verifying it matches the authenticated user's workspace. Authenticated users can enumerate, create, rename, and delete TooljetDB tables in any other workspace by manipulating the organizationId parameter in requests.

Published 2026-08-31

GROWI contains an incorrect authorization vulnerability. If this vulnerability is exploited, an unauthenticated attacker could retrieve the other user's bookmark data.

Published 2026-08-31

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_phoenix invokes the SubdomainHook authorization callback with a nil tenant, so tenant-scoped access checks never see the tenant they are meant to enforce. AshPhoenix.LiveView.SubdomainHook.on_mount/4 attached a handle_params hook to assign the tenant and then immediately called handle_subdomain in the same on_mount. The tenant assign is only written when LiveView later runs handle_params, strictly after on_mount returns, so handle_subdomain read an unset assign and ran as apply(m, f, [socket, nil | a]). A consumer gate that halts when the user does not belong to the tenant instead evaluated nil, either crashing or taking a permissive branch, and it was never re-run once the real subdomain was assigned or on later navigations. The fi

Published 2026-08-31

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_graphql delivers GraphQL subscription payloads for records a subscriber is not authorized to see. In AshGraphql.Subscription.Batcher, do_send/5 resolves the first notification of a batch and filters it with should_send?/1, which drops results whose errors are coded forbidden or not_found or carry no code, precisely so that unauthorized results are not disclosed. The remaining notifications in the batch are read from the process dictionary, re-run through the pipeline, and appended to the outgoing results without that filter. They reach pubsub.publish_subscription/2, and the not is_nil(record) guard drops only nil records, not error-carrying results. Any two qualifying notifications arriving within the default one-second batch interv

Published 2026-08-30

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_graphql allows an authenticated subscriber in one tenant to receive another tenant's records over GraphQL subscriptions. The subscription resolver in AshGraphql.Graphql.Resolver authorizes each notification payload in memory: its fast path calls Ash.can/3 with run_queries?: false, which evaluates the read policy filter against the in-memory record via Ash.Expr.eval/2 and never issues a query. Ash applies multitenancy at query-build and data-layer-prefix time, not inside query.filter, so the evaluated policy carries no tenant condition and a tenant-B notification routed to a tenant-A subscriber is emitted whenever the policy filter is true. The single-notification clause has no tenant guard at all, and the batched clause checks only

Published 2026-08-30

Frappe Framework development builds contain an authorization flaw in the render_jinja_template endpoint that allows low-privileged users to render arbitrary Jinja templates by supplying raw template strings. Attackers with print permission on any document can execute arbitrary SELECT statements against unrelated tables, including reading password hashes from the __Auth table.

Published 2026-08-30

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller in a schema-based multitenant application to receive aggregate values computed from another tenant's rows. When an aggregate is computed over a distinct query, AshSql.AggregateQuery.add_single_aggs/5 rebuilds the outer query from query.from.source alone, which is only the {table, schema} tuple and does not carry query.prefix or query.from.prefix. For strategy(:context) multitenancy those hold the tenant schema, so the rebuilt outer query reads the repo's default schema while the inner correlated subquery still reads the tenant schema, and the two are joined only on primary key. The aggregate, and any relationship join added off the prefix-less binding, is then computed against the wrong tenant's rows. The neighbo

Published 2026-08-30

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to receive an aggregate value computed over rows a more restrictive filter should have excluded, disclosing counts, sums, or lists across an authorization or tenancy boundary. AshSql.Aggregate.different_queries?/2 reports two aggregate queries as different only when their filter and their sort both differ. Aggregate queries rarely carry a sort, so two aggregates that share a name but carry entirely different filters compare as identical. The colliding aggregate keeps its name and is treated as already computed, and select_aggregates returns the first-registered variant's value. The same name reaches the builder twice with different filters when actor or tenant context is stamped into each aggregate's query, so a

Published 2026-08-30

Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash_sql allows a caller to bypass a scoping or authorization filter expressed as exists/2 over a relationship that declares both a limit (or from_many?) and a parent(...)-referencing filter or sort. AshSql.Join.related_query/3 skips the caller-supplied exists predicate for such relationships and delegates it to limit_from_many/5. When the relationship's own filter or sort references parent(...), limit_from_many/5 takes a branch that drops both the limit and the predicate, emitting a bare correlated EXISTS with no predicate. The check then matches any record that has any related row. Most severely, when the expression backs a policy (for example authorize_if expr(exists(memberships, user_id == ^actor(:id)))), the actor-scoping condition

Published 2026-08-30

pac4j-core before 6.5.6 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in CheckProfileTypeAuthorizer that reverses the profile type validation logic. Attackers can authenticate through a weaker client and access resources requiring a stronger profile type by satisfying generic profile checks.

Published 2026-08-29

The Rank Math SEO WordPress plugin before 1.0.277 does not check that the user requesting an automated SEO fix holds the capability WordPress itself requires for the settings being changed, allowing users with the Editor role to modify site-wide core WordPress settings that are reserved to administrators.

Published 2026-08-29

The Booking for Appointments and Events Calendar WordPress plugin before 2.4.9 does not check that a user holds the required capability before letting them change an appointment's status, allowing customers to set arbitrary statuses on appointments they are booked on, including approving their own bookings that were left awaiting approval and overwriting another customer's booking status on a shared appointment.

Published 2026-08-29

Immich through 3.1.0 fails to properly enforce locked asset visibility when assets are locked through the single-asset endpoint, allowing them to remain accessible through shared albums and links. Attackers can read locked assets and their metadata by accessing existing shared albums or links, bypassing the locked visibility protection.

Published 2026-08-28

Piccolo Admin is an admin interface and content management system for Python, built on top of Piccolo. Prior to 1.14.0, piccolo_admin/endpoints.py uses superuser_validators to block PUT, PATCH, DELETE, and POST requests by non-superusers but permits GET requests to configured user and session tables, while piccolo_api/session_auth/tables.py exposes SessionsBase.token because the token column is not secret. In deployments that add the Sessions and User tables to create_admin, a non-superuser administrator can call GET /api/tables/sessions/, obtain another user's live session token, replay it as the Cookie id value to impersonate a superuser, and permanently set superuser to true on the attacker's own row. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.0.

Published 2026-08-28

Vikunja is an open-source self-hosted task management platform. From 0.21.0 until 2.4.0, the project duplication operation in pkg/models/project_duplicate.go allows an authenticated user who can read a source project to place its duplicate beneath an arbitrary target parent project. ProjectDuplicate.CanCreate calls parent.CanCreate on an unhydrated Project containing only the body supplied parent_project_id instead of calling parent.CanWrite, so the target parent write-permission check is skipped. The ordinary project creation path enforces that permission, but PUT /api/v1/projects/{project}/duplicate does not, allowing attacker-owned content to be injected into another user or team project hierarchy. This issue is fixed in version 2.4.0.

Published 2026-08-28

The source-address critical option in the Permissions returned by an authentication callback was only enforced for the PublicKeyCallback and VerifiedPublicKeyCallback paths, extending the fix for CVE-2026-46595. Permissions returned by the PasswordCallback, KeyboardInteractiveCallback, NoClientAuthCallback, and GSSAPIWithMICConfig.AllowLogin callbacks were not validated against the client's remote address, so a source-address restriction set by those callbacks was silently ignored. The check is now applied to the Permissions returned by any authentication callback.

Published 2026-08-28

In Eclipse Lyo versions 2.0.0 to 7.0.0, OAuth server authorization checks can be bypassed when the 2-legged auth is supported by the server. In those cases, application that based their authz filters upon Lyo-provided `AbstractAdapterCredentialsFilter`, are vulnerable. An attacked can create a provisional trusted client (valid use-case) but then it can be used as a trusted client immediately without requiring the administrator approval to clear the provisional status. The 3-legged path requiring user interaction is not vulnerable and rejects provisional clients.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28

This CVE was assigned by Chrome. Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) ingests Chromium, which addresses this vulnerability. Please see Google Chrome Releases for more information.

Published 2026-08-28