| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| BIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses.
This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1. |
| A vulnerability was detected in Yoosee GM8135S Camera 21.00.01.36. Affected is an unknown function of the component Secure Boot. Performing a manipulation results in improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack needs to be approached locally. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. |
| gose parsed the JWS `crit` header into `JwsHeader.Crit` and then never read it. RFC 7515 §4.1.11 requires a recipient to reject a JWS whose listed critical extension parameters it does not understand. gose implements no header extensions, so every token carrying a non-empty `crit` should have been rejected — and none were. |
| A flaw was found in Picketlink's SP signature validation; a SAML response containing zero assertion elements matching the signature check can allow an attacker to forge a SAML response and auth as any principal with any roles on the protected application. |
| A flaw was found in Picketlink Federation SAML; the unsolcited response handler would accept forged assertions with no verification or validation, permitting an unauthed attacker to authenticate as any principal in any role. This could lead to information disclosure, access to restricted operations, or other flaws. |
| Apache Pulsar's MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider authorizes a client with all roles listed in a claim of its JSON Web Token (JWT). The provider is intended for use with token authentication, which verifies the token before authorization. The provider did not verify the token itself: it parsed the token's claims with the signature removed and trusted that authentication had already checked it.
When authentication and authorization are enabled with a non-empty anonymousUserRole setting, some HTTP requests whose credentials fail authentication are not rejected, but are handled as requests of the anonymous user role. For the broker's HTTP endpoints, such as the admin REST API, this fallback applies to requests that do not name an authentication method and requires strictAuthMethod to be false (the default) where that setting is available. For the WebSocket API, failed credentials can also fall back to the anonymous user role; this path does not enforce strictAuthMethod. The authentication data kept for such a request still contained the request's Authorization header. MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider then read the bearer token from that header without verifying its signature and authorized the request with the roles in the token's role claim.
As a result, in deployments that use MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider together with a non-empty anonymousUserRole and that permit this fallback, an unauthenticated client can send an HTTP request, for example to the admin REST API or the WebSocket API, with a forged or unsigned token that lists arbitrary roles, and be authorized with those roles. The impact can include super-user access when the token lists a role configured in superUserRoles, allowing the client to read and change tenants, namespaces, topics, permissions and broker configuration. No valid credentials are required.
Deployments are not affected if they use the default authorization provider (PulsarAuthorizationProvider) or another authorization provider, or if anonymousUserRole is not set (the default). Requests that authenticate successfully with a valid token are not affected, because the token that MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider reads is the token that authentication verified. Connections that use the Pulsar binary protocol are not affected by this issue, because the broker does not keep client authentication data for connections that it assigns to the anonymous user role.
In fixed versions, MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider obtains roles only from tokens that the configured token authentication provider has verified, using its configured keys and validation settings. Broker HTTP requests that are assigned to the anonymous user role are authorized only as that role, and invalid tokens cannot supply additional roles to WebSocket requests. The broker fails to start if MultiRolesTokenAuthorizationProvider is configured with authorization enabled but without a token authentication provider.
This issue affects Apache Pulsar versions from 2.8.1 before 4.0.14 and from 4.1.0 before 4.2.5.
- 4.0.x version users should upgrade to at least 4.0.14.
- 4.1.x and 4.2.x version users should upgrade to at least 4.2.5.
Users operating versions prior to those listed above should upgrade to the aforementioned patched versions or newer versions.
The currently supported Apache Pulsar release lines are 4.0.x and 5.0.x. The supported versions schedule is available at https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-policy/.
Users who cannot upgrade immediately can remove the anonymousUserRole setting from the broker and WebSocket service configurations, or restrict network access to the HTTP endpoints of these services to trusted clients. |
| phpMyAdmin through 5.2.3 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in CustomServer::parseAndValidateAssertionResponse() that never verifies WebAuthn assertion signatures against stored public keys. Attackers holding a victim's MySQL credentials can POST a crafted webauthn_request_response with matching challenge, origin, and rpIdHash to bypass the second factor and gain database privileges. |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network. |
| rclone from 1.55.0 before 1.75.2 contains a signature verification bypass in stable selfupdate that trusts checksums from unsigned bytes preceding the PGP-clearsigned SHA256SUMS block. Attackers controlling the release distribution path can prepend an unsigned checksum line matching a malicious archive, causing selfupdate to install an attacker-controlled rclone executable. |
| A signature validation vulnerability exists in Foxit PDF Editor/Reader’s handling of incrementally updated PDF documents. Changes to visible document content may not invalidate the existing signature, allowing attackers to alter signed content and potentially carry out content spoofing while the document continues to appear validly signed. |
| Authlib is a Python library which builds OAuth and OpenID Connect servers. Prior to 1.9.1, Authlib's OctKey.import_key() and HMAC signing and verification path accept zero-length key material. If an application's secret lookup can return an empty string or empty bytes, a remote attacker can compute the deterministic HS256, HS384, or HS512 signature for arbitrary token claims and have Authlib treat the token as authentic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1. |
| 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. |
| A signature verification vulnerability was discovered in the update installation functionality due to inconsistent validation of the update bundle contents. An attacker with administrative privileges can remotely supply a crafted update bundle that passes signature verification but runs an unsigned script when the bundle is installed. The script runs with root privileges, allowing the attacker to read or modify sensitive data, change the appliance configuration, or shut down the appliance. |
| Sensitive information disclosure and manipulation due to improper token validation. The following products are affected: Acronis Cyber Protect 17 (Linux, Windows) before build 42587. |
| Sensitive information disclosure and manipulation due to improper token validation. The following products are affected: Acronis Cyber Protect 17 (Linux, Windows) before build 42587. |
| The TiendaCrypto para WooCommerce WordPress plugin through 1.2.1 does not correctly verify the authenticity of its payment webhook, validating the request signature against a key that is always empty, which allows unauthenticated attackers to forge webhook notifications and mark arbitrary WooCommerce orders as paid on web servers that preserve request header case. |
| 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. |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Windows Key Distribution Center allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges locally. |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in the attribute certificate path validator (PkixAttrCertPathValidator, also used by PkixAttrCertPathBuilder) in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. bc-csharp before 2.7.0 allows a remote attacker to have a forged X.509 attribute certificate accepted as valid, and so obtain whatever roles or privileges an application grants on the strength of its attributes, via an attribute certificate that names a trusted attribute authority as its issuer but was not signed by it, because the RFC 3281 validation steps check the holder and issuer certification paths, validity period, extensions and revocation status but never verify the attribute certificate's signature with the issuer's public key. Only applications that use these classes to validate attribute certificates are affected. |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Windows Update Stack allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing locally. |
