Vulnerabilities

Summary — last 7 days

New vulnerabilities3,281▲ 287 vs. last week
Critical / high1,455▲ 81 vs. last week
New active exploitation (KEV)7▼ 3 vs. last week
Unscored (no CVSS)607▲ 132 vs. last week
–

39,708 results, sorted by published date (most recent first)

CVEStatusSeverityEPSS Active exploitationAffected technologiesPublished ▼Modified Description
ReceivedCritical (9.8)——Ultimate MultisiteAI10/1/202610/1/2026The Ultimate Multisite – WordPress Multisite SaaS & WaaS Platform plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.15.0 via the `checkout_form` parameter of the `login_customer_after_checkout` function. This is due to the publicly accessible `wu_ajax_nopriv_wu_validate_form` AJAX handler accepting a freely obtainable checkout nonce, and the `checkout_form=wu-finish-checkout` parameter causing `get_validation_rules()` to discard all validation rules while `finish_checkout_form_fields()` returns an empty step list — forcing `is_last_step()` to return true and routing the request directly into full order processing — after which `maybe_create_customer()` resolves the attacker-supplied `email_address` to an existing WordPress user ID without any authentication or ownership verification, and `login_customer_after_checkout()` calls `wp_set_auth_cookie()` for that user ID via a passwordless code path. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to log in as any existing WordPress user — including a Network Super Admin — simply by knowing their email address. Exploitation requires that the targeted user account has no pre-existing Ultimate Multisite customer record; accounts such as a Network Super Admin on a fresh Multisite install, or any administrator or editor added before Ultimate Multisite was configured, satisfy this condition and are therefore exploitable.
ReceivedCritical (9.8)——Super-forms Super FormsAI10/1/202610/1/2026The Super Forms – Drag & Drop Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Privilege Escalation in all versions up to, and including, 6.3.316. This is due to the Register & Login add-on's before_email_success_msg() function whitelisting the client-submitted 'role' key and copying it into the user-data array that is passed directly to wp_insert_user(), without validating the submitted role against the administrator-configured register_user_role, without an allow-list, and without any current_user_can() capability check. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to register a new account with the Administrator role by injecting role=administrator into the data submitted to any published Super Forms registration form (register_login_action='register').
ReceivedCritical (9.3)———10/1/202610/1/2026The object name of a dynamically created BACnet File Object is interpreted as a file path without sufficient validation. Because relative paths are not limited to the intended directory, an unauthenticated remote attacker can traverse outside of it and read or overwrite arbitrary files on the device, which may lead to full system compromise.
ReceivedCritical (9.1)——LatepointAI10/1/202610/1/2026The The Appointment Booking Plugin – LatePoint | Calendar & Scheduling for WordPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 5.7.0. This is due to the software allowing users to execute an action that does not properly validate a value before running do_shortcode. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary shortcodes. The payload is planted during the unauthenticated booking flow and triggered when the Customer Cabinet block rendered by render_customer_dashboard() outputs the stored name into the content stream, where WordPress core's do_shortcode filter at priority 11 re-parses and executes it.
ReceivedCritical (9.3)——Hitachi Coding Software SuiteAI10/1/202610/1/2026Hitachi Coding Software Suite contains a vulnerability related to Hidden Functionality vulnerability which allows an attacker to gain unauthorized access by exploiting hidden accounts or hard coded credentials. This issue affects Hitachi Coding Software Suite: through 3.3.0.
ReceivedCritical (9.3)——Hitachi Coding Software SuiteAI10/1/202610/1/2026Hitachi Coding Software Suite contains a vulnerability related to Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key. The Hardcoding of JWT signing secret key allows an attacker to generate unauthorized Bearer tokens and exploit administrative functions. This issue affects Hitachi Coding Software Suite: through 3.3.0.
ReceivedCritical (9.3)——Hitachi Coding Software SuiteAI10/1/202610/1/2026Hitachi Coding Software Suite contains a vulnerability related to Missing Authentication for Critical Function. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to invoke a critical API, potentially leading to unauthorized retrieval or alteration of sensitive information, or unauthorized manipulation. This issue affects Hitachi Coding Software Suite: through 3.3.0.
ReceivedCritical (9.3)——Hitachi Coding Software SuiteAI10/1/202610/1/2026Hitachi Coding Software Suite contains a vulnerability related to Path Traversal vulnerability that allows an attacker to access, create, modify, or delete files. This issue affects Hitachi Coding Software Suite: through 3.3.0.
ReceivedCritical (9.3)——Genian NAC Ztna Policy ServerAI10/1/202610/1/2026Insufficient authentication and access control on the internal-only IPC SOAP endpoint of the Genian NAC/ZTNA policy server allows an unauthenticated attacker to invoke internal functions
ReceivedCritical (9.4)——Asus RouterAI10/1/202610/1/2026Use of an Externally Controlled Format String in the ASUS Router modules allow a remote authenticated user to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted file uploaded through the web management interface.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.2)——ES Iperf3AI9/30/202610/1/2026iperf3 3.20–3.21 (esnet/iperf) has a pre-auth heap buffer overflow in decrypt_rsa_message(): a 256-byte RSA buffer is BIO_read with the attacker-controlled ciphertext length (guard warns only), so an unauthenticated client overflows the heap via an oversized authtoken; fixed in 3.22
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.4)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not sufficiently restrict which account a certificate could be assigned to. This could allow an attacker to associate a certificate with another user's account, affecting the confidentiality and integrity of that account's encrypted mail and, where certificate-based login is enabled, potentially permitting unauthorized access to the account.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.3)——Kiteworks CoreAI9/30/202610/1/2026A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) weakness in Kiteworks Core could allow an unauthenticated attacker to store crafted content that later executes arbitrary JavaScript in the authenticated session of an administrator who views the affected page. This could have permitted the attacker to gain full administrative control, including the creation of a new administrative account.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.8)——Kiteworks CoreAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Core did not correctly validate a parameter submitted to the password reset workflow. An unauthenticated attacker who knew the email address of a user with a locally stored password could potentially reset that account's password without access to the emailed reset link and then authenticate as that user, including where the account holds administrative privileges.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Improper authentication in a Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway administrative service. An administrative service in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not consistently enforce administrator authentication, so the required password check could be bypassed. An attacker who referenced a valid administrator account could potentially create, modify, or delete internal users and managed domains and change their security-feature configuration without authenticating; deleting a managed domain also removes its user accounts and could lock administrators out of the gateway.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). A server-side request forgery (SSRF) weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway could allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to induce the gateway to issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations. The requests are triggered while the gateway renders message content that references external resources. Depending on the services reachable from the gateway, this could disclose sensitive internal information or trigger unintended actions on internal systems.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). A server-side request forgery (SSRF) weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway could allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to induce the gateway to issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations. The requests are triggered while the gateway performs an online certificate status check for an inbound message. Depending on the services reachable from the gateway, this could disclose sensitive internal information or disrupt gateway operation.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). A server-side request forgery (SSRF) weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway could allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to induce the gateway to issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations. The requests are triggered while the gateway retrieves a certificate revocation list in an inbound message. Depending on the services reachable from the gateway, this could disclose sensitive internal information or disrupt gateway operation.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). A server-side request forgery (SSRF) weakness in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway could allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to induce the gateway to issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations. The requests are triggered while the gateway retrieves an issuer certificate in an inbound message. Depending on the services reachable from the gateway, this could disclose sensitive internal information or disrupt gateway operation.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.1)——Kiteworks Email Protection GatewayAI9/30/202610/1/2026Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery. Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway performed server-side fetches of URLs contained in the message content it processed, without adequately restricting the fetch destination. A remote, unauthenticated sender could craft a message that caused the gateway to issue requests to internal services and cloud instance metadata endpoints and return the responses, potentially disclosing sensitive internal data and, depending on the internal service reached, affecting its state.
Awaiting AnalysisCritical (9.2)——ES Iperf3AI9/30/202610/1/2026iperf3 3.21 (esnet/iperf) contains a remote, unauthenticated heap use-after-free: the server's per-test watchdog server_timer_proc() frees streams without cancelling/joining their worker threads, so a blocked worker dereferences a freed iperf_stream; fixed in 3.22.
ReceivedCritical (9.2)——Openbsd LdapdAI9/30/20269/30/2026In ldapd in OpenBSD 7.8 before errata 057 and 7.9 before errata 021, delegated BSD authentication results are correlated only by the LDAP child process client file descriptor and LDAP message ID. After a connection closes, a later connection that reuses the same file descriptor and message ID can receive the earlier authentication result. A remote attacker who can reach ldapd can complete a Bind as another identity. A missing connection can also cause a NULL pointer dereference. (ldapd is not enabled by default.)
DeferredCritical (9.2)——PiscinaAI9/30/20269/30/2026piscina is a node.js worker pool implementation. Prior to 4.9.4, 5.3.2, and 6.0.0-rc.5, Piscina stores ThreadPool.options in src/index.ts as a plain object that inherits from Object.prototype. Applications with a separate prototype-pollution primitive can therefore supply inherited values for security-sensitive options that do not have own defaults. An inherited execArgv value is passed to the Node.js Worker constructor and can preload attacker-controlled code in worker threads, an inherited loadBalancer function can execute during task scheduling, and inherited env values can alter worker environments. This issue is fixed in versions 4.9.4, 5.3.2, and 6.0.0-rc.5.
DeferredCritical (10)——KobakoAI9/30/20269/30/2026Kobako is a Ruby gem that embeds a Wasm-isolated mruby interpreter inside applications, allowing execution of untrusted Ruby scripts (LLM-generated code, user formulas, student submissions, third-party plugins) in-process without giving them access to host memory, files, network, or credentials. From version 0.1.0 to before version 0.9.1, a guest mruby script running inside the Kobako sandbox can execute arbitrary Ruby in the host process, fully escaping the sandbox. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.1.
DeferredCritical (9.3)——Yii2 Starter KIT Yii2-starter-kitAI9/30/20269/30/2026yii2-starter-kit through 4.2.0 exposes the Yii debug and Gii modules to all IP addresses by setting allowedIPs to ['*'] in its default development configuration. Unauthenticated remote attackers can access the debug endpoint to read sensitive data including session cookies and database queries, or access the Gii endpoint to generate and write PHP files into the application directory.