Search
Search Results (413794 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-115508 | 1 Unclecode | 1 Crawl4ai | 2026-10-23 | 6.5 Medium |
| Crawl4AI 0.7.0 before 0.9.5 contains an inefficient regular expression complexity vulnerability in the Docker API server that allows authenticated API clients to supply unbounded regular expressions in /crawl request bodies. Attackers can submit catastrophic-backtracking patterns via RegexExtractionStrategy.custom, RegexChunking.patterns or JsonCss, JsonXPath and JsonLxml schema regex fields against a crafted page to freeze the entire server, including /health. | ||||
| CVE-2026-114615 | 1 Authlib | 1 Authlib | 2026-10-23 | 7.4 High |
| Authlib is a Python library which builds OAuth and OpenID Connect servers. From 1.3.1 until 1.9.0, OctKey.import_key() checks asymmetric-key markers only at byte zero while Authlib's PEM loaders accept leading whitespace, comments, or a byte-order mark. In deployments that use the documented mixed algorithm registry and already configure verification with PEM or certificate bytes containing such a prefix, an unauthenticated attacker who knows those same public-key bytes can use them as an HMAC secret and forge HS256 tokens with arbitrary identity or authorization claims. This is a bypass of the remediation for CVE-2024-37568. The module-level jwt object reaches OctKey.import_key() in authlib/jose/rfc7518/oct_key.py, where POSSIBLE_UNSAFE_KEYS fails to identify prefixed asymmetric key material. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79855 | 2026-10-23 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79859 | 2026-10-23 | 9.8 Critical | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79888 | 2026-10-23 | 8.1 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79891 | 2026-10-23 | 8.1 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79893 | 2026-10-23 | 7.5 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79894 | 2026-10-23 | 7.5 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79955 | 2026-10-23 | 7.5 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-79956 | 2026-10-23 | 7.2 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95704 | 2026-10-23 | 7.2 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95705 | 2026-10-23 | 7.2 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95709 | 2026-10-23 | 7.2 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95711 | 2026-10-23 | 7.1 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95712 | 2026-10-23 | 7.1 High | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95717 | 2026-10-23 | 5.5 Medium | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95718 | 2026-10-23 | 5.3 Medium | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95719 | 2026-10-23 | 4.9 Medium | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95720 | 2026-10-23 | 4.4 Medium | ||
| No description provided | ||||
| CVE-2026-95721 | 2026-10-23 | 3.3 Low | ||
| No description provided | ||||
