Overview 19 matches · 1 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 7 CISA KEV · 6 public PoC · 2 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
1
5.3%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
Outside Waratek scope
0
0.0%
Not applicable
18
94.7%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
18
94.7%
not established
1
5.3%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
19
100.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 7 / year
20131
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
Exploited1
20140
20150
20160
20170
20182
Not applicable2
Critical1
Medium1
not blocked2
Exploited2
20190
20202
Not applicable2
Critical1
High1
not blocked2
Exploited2
20210
20220
20231
Not applicable1
Critical1
not blocked1
Exploited1
20241
Not applicable1
Critical1
not blocked1
Exploited1
20255
Not applicable5
Critical3
High1
Medium1
not blocked5
Exploited5
20267
Mitigation candidate1
Not applicable6
Critical6
High1
not blocked6
not established1
Exploited7
2014201620182020202220242026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-117601 | Critical | 2026-10-27 | Not applicable | Exploited | Electrum before 4.8.3 fails to verify signatures of wallet-owned inputs in unconfirmed mempool transactions, allowing malicious servers to replace a just-broadcast transaction with a conflicting one. Attackers can swallow the user's transaction and display an invalid zero-fee copy paying an attacker address, tricking users into RBF fee-bumping and signing it. |
| CVE-2026-67276 | Critical | 2026-09-05 | Not applicable | Exploited | RouterOS does not compare the complete RSA public key when matching an SSH authentication request to an authorized user key, checking the key type and modulus but omitting the exponent. Because signature verification uses the client-supplied key, an attacker knowing an authorized RSA modulus can supply a key with exponent one, forge a valid signature, and open an SSH command channel as the target user without the private key.This issue affects only 7.x branch was fixed in versions: 7.23.4 (Long-term) and 7.24.2 (Stable) |
| CVE-2026-76581 | Critical | 2026-08-28 | Not applicable | Exploited | The WPMU DEV Dashboard plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 5.0.1. This is due to inconsistent and ambiguous HMAC message construction between the unauthenticated `wdpsso_step1` and `wdpsso_step2` AJAX actions, where step 1 signs and discloses an unseparated concatenation of the token, state, redirect, and domain values, while step 2 verifies an unseparated concatenation that omits the domain field. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers, on sites connected to WPMU DEV with Hub SSO enabled and mapped to an administrator, to obtain a valid HMAC from step 1 and replay it to step 2 by moving the domain value into the redirect field, resulting in an authenticated administrator session. |
| CVE-2026-5430 | Critical | 2026-08-06 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | The JWT authentication mechanism accepts tokens signed with algorithms other than those explicitly configured or supported. This allows an attacker to craft a JWT with an unsupported algorithm, which is then incorrectly validated, leading to unauthorized access. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may result in unauthorized access to the system, including the potential compromise of administrative accounts and full account takeover. The CVSS score is adjusted to 9.8 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) in single-tenant deployments, reflecting that the impact is contained within a single security authority boundary. |
| CVE-2026-48558 | Critical | 2026-06-12 | Not applicable | Exploited | SimpleHelp versions 5.5.15 and prior and 6.0 pre-release versions contain an authentication bypass vulnerability in the OIDC authentication flow. When OIDC authentication is configured, identity tokens submitted during login are accepted without verifying their cryptographic signature. In a vulnerable configuration, a remote, unauthenticated attacker can submit a forged token containing arbitrary identity claims to obtain a fully authenticated technician session. In some configurations, this may also allow bypass of multi-factor authentication. No user interaction is required. |
| CVE-2026-10795 | High | 2026-06-11 | Not applicable | Exploited | The UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.26.4 via the UpdraftPlus_Remote_Communications_V2::wp_loaded function. This is due to insufficient validation of the remote communications message format, where signature verification can be bypassed and unchecked decryption return values collapse to a predictable all-zero encryption key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to forge arbitrary RPC commands and run them as the connected administrator, such as uploading and activating a malicious plugin, which ultimately leads to remote code execution. |
| CVE-2026-3564 | Critical | 2026-03-17 | Not applicable | Exploited | A condition in the ScreenConnect server component may allow an actor with access to server-level cryptographic material used for authentication to obtain unauthorized access, including elevated privileges, in certain scenarios. ScreenConnect host and guest client agents are not independently affected by this CVE. |
| CVE-2025-59719 | Critical | 2025-12-09 | Not applicable | Exploited | An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.9 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the FortiCloud SSO login authentication via a crafted SAML response message. |
| CVE-2025-59718 | Critical | 2025-12-09 | Not applicable | Exploited | A improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.17, FortiProxy 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.14, FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.21, FortiSwitchManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, FortiSwitchManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.5 allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the FortiCloud SSO login authentication via a crafted SAML response message. |
| CVE-2024-13990 | Critical | 2025-09-19 | Not applicable | Exploited | MicroWorld eScan AV's update mechanism failed to ensure authenticity and integrity of updates: update packages were delivered and accepted without robust cryptographic verification. As a result, an on-path attacker could perform a man-in-the-middle (MitM) attack and substitute malicious update payloads for legitimate ones. The eScan AV client accepted these substituted packages and executed or loaded their components (including sideloaded DLLs and Java/installer payloads), enabling remote code execution on affected systems. MicroWorld eScan confirmed remediation of the update mechanism on 2023-07-31 but versioning details are unavailable. NOTE: MicroWorld eScan disputes the characterization in third-party reports, stating the issue relates to 2018–2019 and that controls were implemented then. |
| CVE-2025-47827 | Medium | 2025-06-05 | Not applicable | Exploited | In IGEL OS before 11, Secure Boot can be bypassed because the igel-flash-driver module improperly verifies a cryptographic signature. Ultimately, a crafted root filesystem can be mounted from an unverified SquashFS image. |
| CVE-2024-7344 | High | 2025-01-14 | Not applicable | Exploited | Howyar UEFI Application "Reloader" (32-bit and 64-bit) is vulnerable to execution of unsigned software in a hardcoded path. |
| CVE-2024-45409 | Critical | 2024-09-10 | Not applicable | Exploited | The Ruby SAML library is for implementing the client side of a SAML authorization. Ruby-SAML in <= 12.2 and 1.13.0 <= 1.16.0 does not properly verify the signature of the SAML Response. An unauthenticated attacker with access to any signed saml document (by the IdP) can thus forge a SAML Response/Assertion with arbitrary contents. This would allow the attacker to log in as arbitrary user within the vulnerable system. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.17.0 and 1.12.3. |
| CVE-2020-22653 | Critical | 2023-01-20 | Not applicable | Exploited | In Ruckus R310 10.5.1.0.199, Ruckus R500 10.5.1.0.199, Ruckus R600 10.5.1.0.199, Ruckus T300 10.5.1.0.199, Ruckus T301n 10.5.1.0.199, Ruckus T301s 10.5.1.0.199, SmartCell Gateway 200 (SCG200) before 3.6.2.0.795, SmartZone 100 (SZ-100) before 3.6.2.0.795, SmartZone 300 (SZ300) before 3.6.2.0.795, Virtual SmartZone (vSZ) before 3.6.2.0.795, ZoneDirector 1100 9.10.2.0.130, ZoneDirector 1200 10.2.1.0.218, ZoneDirector 3000 10.2.1.0.218, ZoneDirector 5000 10.0.1.0.151, a vulnerability allows attackers to exploit the official image signature to force injection unauthorized image signature. |
| CVE-2020-1464 | High | 2020-08-17 | Not applicable | Exploited | A spoofing vulnerability exists when Windows incorrectly validates file signatures. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could bypass security features and load improperly signed files. In an attack scenario, an attacker could bypass security features intended to prevent improperly signed files from being loaded. The update addresses the vulnerability by correcting how Windows validates file signatures. |
| CVE-2020-2021 | Critical | 2020-06-29 | Not applicable | Exploited | When Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) authentication is enabled and the 'Validate Identity Provider Certificate' option is disabled (unchecked), improper verification of signatures in PAN-OS SAML authentication enables an unauthenticated network-based attacker to access protected resources. The attacker must have network access to the vulnerable server to exploit this vulnerability. This issue affects PAN-OS 9.1 versions earlier than PAN-OS 9.1.3; PAN-OS 9.0 versions earlier than PAN-OS 9.0.9; PAN-OS 8.1 versions earlier than PAN-OS 8.1.15, and all versions of PAN-OS 8.0 (EOL). This issue does not affect PAN-OS 7.1. This issue cannot be exploited if SAML is not used for authentication. This issue cannot be exploited if the 'Validate Identity Provider Certificate' option is enabled (checked) in the SAML Identity Provider Server Profile. Resources that can be protected by SAML-based single sign-on (SSO) authentication are: GlobalProtect Gateway, GlobalProtect Portal, GlobalProtect Clientless VPN, Authentication and Captive Portal, PAN-OS next-generation firewalls (PA-Series, VM-Series) and Panorama web interfaces, Prisma Access In the case of GlobalProtect Gateways, GlobalProtect Portal, Clientless VPN, Captive Portal, and Prisma Access, an unauthenticated attacker with network access to the affected servers can gain access to protected resources if allowed by configured authentication and Security policies. There is no impact on the integrity and availability of the gateway, portal or VPN server. An attacker cannot inspect or tamper with sessions of regular users. In the worst case, this is a critical severity vulnerability with a CVSS Base Score of 10.0 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N). In the case of PAN-OS and Panorama web interfaces, this issue allows an unauthenticated attacker with network access to the PAN-OS or Panorama web interfaces to log in as an administrator and perform administrative actions. In the worst-case scenario, this is a critical severity vulnerability with a CVSS Base Score of 10.0 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H). If the web interfaces are only accessible to a restricted management network, then the issue is lowered to a CVSS Base Score of 9.6 (CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H). Palo Alto Networks is not aware of any malicious attempts to exploit this vulnerability. |
| CVE-2018-5383 | Medium | 2018-08-07 | Not applicable | Exploited | Bluetooth firmware or operating system software drivers in macOS versions before 10.13, High Sierra and iOS versions before 11.4, and Android versions before the 2018-06-05 patch may not sufficiently validate elliptic curve parameters used to generate public keys during a Diffie-Hellman key exchange, which may allow a remote attacker to obtain the encryption key used by the device. |
| CVE-2017-3198 | Critical | 2018-07-09 | Not applicable | Exploited | GIGABYTE BRIX UEFI firmware does not cryptographically validate images prior to updating the system firmware. Additionally, the firmware updates are served over HTTP. An attacker can make arbitrary modifications to firmware images without being detected. |
| CVE-2013-3900 | High | 2013-12-11 | Not applicable | Exploited | Why is Microsoft republishing a CVE from 2013? We are republishing CVE-2013-3900 in the Security Update Guide to update the Security Updates table and to inform customers that the EnableCertPaddingCheck is available in all currently supported versions of Windows 10 and Windows 11. While the format is different from the original CVE published in 2013, except for clarifications about how to configure the EnableCertPaddingCheck registry value, the information herein remains unchanged from the original text published on December 10, 2013, Microsoft does not plan to enforce the stricter verification behavior as a default functionality on supported releases of Microsoft Windows. This behavior remains available as an opt-in feature via reg key setting, and is available on supported editions of Windows released since December 10, 2013. This includes all currently supported versions of Windows 10 and Windows 11. The supporting code for this reg key was incorporated at the time of release for Windows 10 and Windows 11, so no security update is required; however, the reg key must be set. See the Security Updates table for the list of affected software. Vulnerability Description A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the WinVerifyTrust function handles Windows Authenticode signature verification for portable executable (PE) files. An anonymous attacker could exploit the vulnerability by modifying an existing signed executable file to leverage unverified portions of the file in such a way as to add malicious code to the file without invalidating the signature. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. If a user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights. Exploitation of this vulnerability requires that a user or application run or install a specially crafted, signed PE file. An attacker could modify an... See more at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2013-3900 |