Total
655 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-47201 | 1 Goauthentik | 1 Authentik | 2026-06-04 | N/A | 8.5 HIGH |
| authentik is an open-source identity provider. Prior to versions 2025.12.5, 2026.2.3, and 2026.5.1, authentik's SAML Source ACS endpoint is vulnerable to XML Signature Wrapping when validating upstream SAML responses. An attacker with any account at the upstream IdP can reuse a valid signed assertion to authenticate as another federated user. This issue has been patched in versions 2025.12.5, 2026.2.3, and 2026.5.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-45614 | 2026-06-04 | N/A | 4.7 MEDIUM | ||
| OP-TEE is a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as companion to a non-secure Linux kernel running on Arm; Cortex-A cores using the TrustZone technology. Prior to version 4.11.0, on many of the ECDH shared secret paths, the public key isn't verified to be a point on the correct curve. By passing approximately 30-40 crafted public keys to OP-TEE, the private key can be reconstructed by a normal world attacker. When calling TEE_DeriveKey the public key is provided with full X and Y values, but the (X, Y) point might not satisfy the `Y^2 == X^3 + aX + b mod P` math for the specific curve that is used. When those public keys aren't rejected, the attacker can select public keys such that each DeriveKey call will leak `d % r` where `d` is the private key and `r` comes from the relationship between the correct curve and the attacker selected curve. With enough leaked data the Chinese remainder theorem can be used to recover the full private key. Version 4.11.0 fixes the issue. | |||||
| CVE-2026-6873 | 2026-06-04 | N/A | 3.1 LOW | ||
| An issue was discovered in Django 6.0 before 6.0.6 and 5.2 before 5.2.15. `django.http.HttpRequest.get_signed_cookie` in Django uses a non-injective salt derivation (concatenating the cookie name and salt argument), which allows a remote attacker to use a cookie in a context different from the one where it was signed, via distinct `(name, salt)` pairs that produce the same concatenation. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Peng Zhou for reporting this issue. | |||||
| CVE-2026-9793 | 1 Redhat | 1 Build Of Keycloak | 2026-06-03 | N/A | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. When a JSON Web Encryption (JWE) encrypted request object is submitted, Keycloak may incorrectly process unsigned claims if the decrypted content is raw JSON, bypassing the configured signature policy. This allows a remote attacker to submit unauthorized claims, leading to a compromise of data integrity within the OpenID Connect (OIDC) authorization flow. While a redirect URI allowlist acts as a compensating control, this vulnerability violates OIDC Core and Financial-grade API (FAPI) signing requirements. | |||||
| CVE-2026-4258 | 1 Bitwiseshiftleft | 1 Stanford Javascript Crypto Library | 2026-06-03 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| All versions of the package sjcl are vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature due to missing point-on-curve validation in sjcl.ecc.basicKey.publicKey(). An attacker can recover a victim's ECDH private key by sending crafted off-curve public keys and observing ECDH outputs. The dhJavaEc() function directly returns the raw x-coordinate of the scalar multiplication result (no hashing), providing a plaintext oracle without requiring any decryption feedback. | |||||
| CVE-2026-39829 | 1 Golang | 1 Crypto | 2026-06-02 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| The RSA and DSA public key parsers did not enforce size limits on key parameters. A crafted public key with an excessively large modulus or DSA parameter could cause several minutes of CPU consumption during signature verification. This could be triggered by unauthenticated clients during public key authentication. RSA moduli are now limited to 8192 bits, and DSA parameters are validated per FIPS 186-2. | |||||
| CVE-2025-67903 | 2026-06-01 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| Northern.tech Mender Client 5 before 5.0.4 allows a Cryptographic signature verification bypass. | |||||
| CVE-2026-48526 | 1 Pyjwt Project | 1 Pyjwt | 2026-06-01 | N/A | 7.4 HIGH |
| PyJWT is a JSON Web Token implementation in Python. Prior to 2.13.0, when the verifier is decoding JSON Web Tokens, while supporting both asymmetric and HMAC algorithms, the library does not validate use of JSON Web Keys in HMAC algorithm, allowing attacker to use the issuer public key as the secret key for HMAC algorithm. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.13.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-48523 | 1 Pyjwt Project | 1 Pyjwt | 2026-06-01 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| PyJWT is a JSON Web Token implementation in Python. From 2.9.0 to 2.12.1, there is a verifier-side algorithm allow-list bypass when jwt.decode() or jwt.decode_complete() are called with a PyJWK key. The token header alg is checked against the caller-supplied algorithms allow-list, but signature verification is performed with the algorithm bound to the PyJWK object instead of the header algorithm. An attacker who controls a registered JWK/JWKS private key can sign with a disallowed algorithm, advertise an allowed algorithm in the JWT header, and still be accepted. The issue affects the documented PyJWKClient.get_signing_key_from_jwt(...) flow. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.13.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-42602 | 1 Opentelemetry | 1 Opentelemetry Collector Contrib | 2026-06-01 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| azureauthextension is the Azure Authenticator Extension. From 0.124.0 to 0.150.0, a server-side authentication bypass in azureauthextension allows any party who holds a single valid Azure access token for any scope the collector's configured identity can mint for to authenticate to any OpenTelemetry receiver that uses auth: azure_auth. The extension's Authenticate method does not validate incoming bearer tokens as JWTs. Instead, it calls its own configured credential to obtain an access token and compares the client's token to the result with string equality — and the scope for that server-side token request is taken from the client-supplied Host header. As a result, a token minted for any Azure resource the service principal has ever been issued a token for (ARM, Graph, Key Vault, Storage, etc.) will authenticate to the collector if the attacker picks a matching Host. Tokens are replayable for the full issued lifetime (commonly several hours for managed identity tokens). | |||||
| CVE-2026-44720 | 2026-05-29 | N/A | N/A | ||
| OpenLearnX is an open-source, decentralized learning and assessment platform. Prior to 2.0.4, a critical authentication vulnerability was identified in OpenLearnX that could allow unauthorized access to user accounts under specific conditions. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.4. | |||||
| CVE-2026-45575 | 2026-05-27 | N/A | 7.4 HIGH | ||
| epa4all-client is the Java Client for epa4all / ePA 3.0 in the Telematik Infrastruktur. Prior to 1.2.2, an attacker who can MITM the TLS connection between the client and the IDP (within the TI network) can substitute a forged discovery document. The forged document redirects uri_puk_idp_enc and uri_puk_idp_sig to attacker-controlled URLs. The client then encrypts the SMC-B-signed challenge response to the attacker's encryption key and POSTs it to the attacker's auth endpoint. This captures the signed authentication material. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.2. | |||||
| CVE-2025-41669 | 2026-05-27 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH | ||
| The Web-based Management allows a remote low privileged Engineer user to install additional APPs on the device downloaded from the PLCnext Store without implementing any data verification mechanism, leading to the capability for an Engineer user to reach arbitrary code execution with root privileges on the PLC device. A successful exploitation may allow to install a manipulated APP package, potentially impacting integrity and availability of the PLCnext Control. | |||||
| CVE-2026-4115 | 1 Putty | 1 Putty | 2026-05-25 | 2.6 LOW | 3.7 LOW |
| A vulnerability was detected in PuTTY 0.83. Affected is the function eddsa_verify of the file crypto/ecc-ssh.c of the component Ed25519 Signature Handler. The manipulation results in improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack may be performed from remote. The attack requires a high level of complexity. The exploitability is told to be difficult. The exploit is now public and may be used. The real existence of this vulnerability is still doubted at the moment. The patch is identified as af996b5ec27ab79bae3882071b9d6acf16044549. It is advisable to implement a patch to correct this issue. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a patch for the affected product. However, at the moment there is no proof that this flaw might have any real-world impact. | |||||
| CVE-2026-33117 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Azure Sdk For Java | 2026-05-22 | N/A | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| The Java Key Vault Keys library in the Azure SDK for Java contains an issue in the local cryptographic verification path where authentication tag comparison was implemented incorrectly. In affected applications that use the vulnerable local cryptography path, specially crafted encrypted input may bypass integrity verification checks. Operations delegated to the Key Vault service are not affected. The issue is addressed in version 4.10.6. | |||||
| CVE-2026-6328 | 2026-05-19 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Improper input validation, Improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in XQUIC Project XQUIC xquic on Linux (QUIC protocol implementation, packet processing module, STREAM frame handler modules) allows Protocol Manipulation.This issue affects XQUIC: through 1.8.3. | |||||
| CVE-2026-44699 | 2026-05-18 | N/A | N/A | ||
| LibJWT is a C JSON Web Token Library. From 3.0.0 to 3.3.2, libjwt accepts an RSA JWK that does not contain an alg parameter as the verification key for an HS256/HS384/HS512 token. In the OpenSSL backend, this causes HMAC verification to run with a zero-length key, so an attacker can forge a valid JWT without knowing any secret or RSA private key. This is an algorithm-confusion authentication bypass. It affects applications that load RSA keys from JWKS where alg is omitted, which is valid JWK syntax and common in real deployments, and then choose the verification algorithm from the JWT header, for example in a kid lookup callback. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.3.3. | |||||
| CVE-2026-44714 | 2026-05-18 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH | ||
| The bitcoinj library is a Java implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. Prior to 0.17.1, ScriptExecution.correctlySpends() contains two fast-path verification bugs for standard P2PKH and native P2WPKH spends in core/src/main/java/org/bitcoinj/script/ScriptExecution.java. In both branches, bitcoinj verifies an attacker-controlled signature/public-key pair but fails to verify that the public key is the one committed to by the output being spent. As a result, any attacker keypair can satisfy bitcoinj's local verification for arbitrary P2PKH and P2WPKH outputs. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.17.1. | |||||
| CVE-2026-44309 | 2026-05-18 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| Gitsign is a keyless Sigstore to signing tool for Git commits with your a GitHub / OIDC identity. Prior to 0.16.0, gitsign verify and gitsign verify-tag re-encode commit/tag objects through go-git's EncodeWithoutSignature before checking the signature, instead of verifying against the raw git object bytes. For malformed objects with duplicate tree headers, git-core and go-git parse different trees: git-core uses the first, go-git uses the second. A signature crafted over the go-git-normalized form (second tree) passes gitsign verify while git-core resolves the commit to a completely different tree. This breaks the invariant that a verified signature, the commit semantics git-core presents to users, and the object hash logged in Rekor all refer to the same content. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.16.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-38651 | 1 Netmaker | 1 Netmaker | 2026-05-18 | N/A | 8.2 HIGH |
| Authentication Bypass vulnerability exists in Netmaker versions prior to 1.5.0. The VerifyHostToken function in logic/jwts.go fails to validate the JWT signature when verifying host tokens. An attacker can forge a JWT signed with any arbitrary key and use it to impersonate any host in the network, gaining access to sensitive information | |||||