CWE-345
DiscouragedInsufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.
949 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-4Q3H-VP4R-PRV2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-25 23:00 – Updated: 2026-02-27 21:52Impact
An unauthenticated attacker can forge a Google authentication token with alg: "none" to log in as any user linked to a Google account, without knowing their credentials. All deployments with Google authentication enabled are affected.
Patches
The fix hardcodes the expected RS256 algorithm instead of trusting the JWT header, and replaces the Google adapter's custom key fetcher with jwks-rsa which rejects unknown key IDs.
Workarounds
Disable Google authentication until you can upgrade.
References
- GitHub advisory: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/security/advisories/GHSA-4q3h-vp4r-prv2
- Fixed in Parse Server 9.3.1-alpha.4: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/9.3.1-alpha.4
- Fixed in Parse Server 8.6.3: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/8.6.3
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 9.3.1-alpha.3"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "parse-server"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "9.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "9.3.1-alpha.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 8.6.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "parse-server"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.6.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27804"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327",
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-25T23:00:49Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-26T00:16:25Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nAn unauthenticated attacker can forge a Google authentication token with `alg: \"none\"` to log in as any user linked to a Google account, without knowing their credentials. All deployments with Google authentication enabled are affected.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe fix hardcodes the expected `RS256` algorithm instead of trusting the JWT header, and replaces the Google adapter\u0027s custom key fetcher with `jwks-rsa` which rejects unknown key IDs.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nDisable Google authentication until you can upgrade.\n\n### References\n\n- GitHub advisory: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/security/advisories/GHSA-4q3h-vp4r-prv2\n- Fixed in Parse Server 9.3.1-alpha.4: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/9.3.1-alpha.4\n- Fixed in Parse Server 8.6.3: https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/8.6.3",
"id": "GHSA-4q3h-vp4r-prv2",
"modified": "2026-02-27T21:52:22Z",
"published": "2026-02-25T23:00:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/security/advisories/GHSA-4q3h-vp4r-prv2"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27804"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/commit/9b94083accb7f3e72c6b8126c195c7a03dd2dfd7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/commit/9d5942d50e55c822924c27b05aa98f1393e7a330"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/8.6.3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/parse-community/parse-server/releases/tag/9.3.1-alpha.4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Parse Server: Account takeover via JWT algorithm confusion in Google auth adapter"
}
GHSA-4QP6-97JW-9PRG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:20 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:20When the AMD Platform Security Processor (PSP) boot rom loads, authenticates, and subsequently decrypts an encrypted FW, due to insufficient verification of the integrity of decrypted image, arbitrary code may be executed in the PSP when encrypted firmware images are used.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-26315"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-11-16T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "When the AMD Platform Security Processor (PSP) boot rom loads, authenticates, and subsequently decrypts an encrypted FW, due to insufficient verification of the integrity of decrypted image, arbitrary code may be executed in the PSP when encrypted firmware images are used.",
"id": "GHSA-4qp6-97jw-9prg",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:20:47Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:20:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-26315"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/product-security/bulletin/amd-sb-1021"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-4R9R-CH6F-VXMX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-08-22 16:56 – Updated: 2025-08-22 16:56Summary
Using torch.utils.bottleneck.main.run_cprofile function, which is a pytorch library function to execute remote pickle file.
Details
The attack payload executes in the following steps:
First, the attacker craft the payload by calling to torch.utils.bottleneck.main.run_cprofile function in reduce method Then when the victim after checking whether the pickle file is safe by using Picklescan library and this library doesn't dectect any dangerous functions, decide to pickle.load() this malicious pickle file, thus lead to remote code execution.
PoC
import torch.utils.bottleneck.__main__ as bottleneck_main
class EvilTorchUtilsBottleneckRunCprofile:
def __reduce__(self):
code = '__import__("os").system("whoami")'
globs = {}
return bottleneck_main.run_cprofile, (code, globs)
Impact
Who is impacted? Any organization or individual relying on picklescan to detect malicious pickle files inside PyTorch models. What is the impact? Attackers can embed malicious code in pickle file that remains undetected but executes when the pickle file is loaded. Supply Chain Attack: Attackers can distribute infected pickle files across ML models, APIs, or saved Python objects.
Corresponding
https://github.com/FredericDT https://github.com/Qhaoduoyu
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.0.27"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "picklescan"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.28"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-08-22T16:56:25Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nUsing torch.utils.bottleneck.__main__.run_cprofile\n function, which is a pytorch library function to execute remote pickle file.\n\n### Details\n\nThe attack payload executes in the following steps:\n\nFirst, the attacker craft the payload by calling to torch.utils.bottleneck.__main__.run_cprofile\n function in reduce method\nThen when the victim after checking whether the pickle file is safe by using Picklescan library and this library doesn\u0027t dectect any dangerous functions, decide to pickle.load() this malicious pickle file, thus lead to remote code execution.\n\n### PoC\n\n```\nimport torch.utils.bottleneck.__main__ as bottleneck_main\n\nclass EvilTorchUtilsBottleneckRunCprofile:\n def __reduce__(self):\n code = \u0027__import__(\"os\").system(\"whoami\")\u0027\n globs = {}\n return bottleneck_main.run_cprofile, (code, globs)\n```\n\n### Impact\n\nWho is impacted? Any organization or individual relying on picklescan to detect malicious pickle files inside PyTorch models.\nWhat is the impact? Attackers can embed malicious code in pickle file that remains undetected but executes when the pickle file is loaded.\nSupply Chain Attack: Attackers can distribute infected pickle files across ML models, APIs, or saved Python objects.\n\n### Corresponding\n\nhttps://github.com/FredericDT\nhttps://github.com/Qhaoduoyu",
"id": "GHSA-4r9r-ch6f-vxmx",
"modified": "2025-08-22T16:56:25Z",
"published": "2025-08-22T16:56:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/security/advisories/GHSA-4r9r-ch6f-vxmx"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/pull/47"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/commit/7f994d62084fe43f1cffdef2f9bae6923344ef53"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/releases/tag/v0.0.28"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [],
"summary": "Picklescan missing detection when calling pytorch function torch.utils.bottleneck.__main__.run_cprofile"
}
GHSA-4V22-J8V6-QGVH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-19 15:33 – Updated: 2026-06-23 15:32Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in Apache APISIX.
The openid-connect plugin under default configuration has an attack surface that allows the attacker to spoof identity headers allowing the attacker to get unauthorized access the protected resources. This issue affects Apache APISIX: from 2.3 through 3.16.0.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 3.17.0, which fixes the issue.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44087"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-19T14:16:22Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in Apache APISIX.\n\nThe openid-connect plugin under default configuration has an attack surface that allows the attacker to spoof identity headers allowing the attacker to get unauthorized access the protected resources.\nThis issue affects Apache APISIX: from 2.3 through 3.16.0.\n\nUsers are recommended to upgrade to version 3.17.0, which fixes the issue.",
"id": "GHSA-4v22-j8v6-qgvh",
"modified": "2026-06-23T15:32:30Z",
"published": "2026-06-19T15:33:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44087"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/72ryrgdssk6s2x9d6xn14bxyyl878xfm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/06/19/7"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-4V58-8P28-2RQ3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-05 18:46 – Updated: 2026-05-05 18:46Summary
Missing expiration, hash, and length enforcement in delegated metadata validation in awslabs/tough before tough-v0.22.0 allows remote authenticated users with delegated signing authority to bypass TUF specification integrity checks for delegated targets metadata and poison the local metadata cache, because load_delegations does not apply the same validation checks as the top-level targets metadata path.
Impact
The tough library, prior to 0.22.0, does not properly verify delegated target metadata. It allows someone with write access to the metadata to serve expired or otherwise invalid targets from a TUF repository which tough will then trust rather than reject.
Impacted Versions:
tough 0.9.0 through 0.21.x, tuftool through 0.14.x
Patches
This issue has been addressed in tough version 0.22.0 and tuftool version 0.15.0. We recommend upgrading to the latest version and ensuring any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes.
Workarounds
No workarounds to this issue are known.
References
- CVE-2026-6967 If there are any questions or comments about this advisory, please contact [AWS/Amazon] Security via the vulnerability reporting page or directly via email to aws-security@amazon.com. Please do not create a public GitHub issue.
Acknowledgement
Amazon Web Services Labs would like to thank Oleh Konko of 1seal for collaborating on this issue through the coordinated vulnerability disclosure process.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "tough"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.9.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.22.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "tuftool"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.15.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-6967"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-05T18:46:48Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-24T20:16:29Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nMissing expiration, hash, and length enforcement in delegated metadata validation in awslabs/tough before tough-v0.22.0 allows remote authenticated users with delegated signing authority to bypass TUF specification integrity checks for delegated targets metadata and poison the local metadata cache, because load_delegations does not apply the same validation checks as the top-level targets metadata path.\n\n### Impact\nThe tough library, prior to 0.22.0, does not properly verify delegated target metadata. It allows someone with write access to the metadata to serve expired or otherwise invalid targets from a TUF repository which tough will then trust rather than reject.\n\n### Impacted Versions: \ntough 0.9.0 through 0.21.x, tuftool through 0.14.x\n\n### Patches\nThis issue has been addressed in tough version 0.22.0 and tuftool version 0.15.0. We recommend upgrading to the latest version and ensuring any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. \n\n### Workarounds\nNo workarounds to this issue are known.\n\n### References\n* CVE-2026-6967\nIf there are any questions or comments about this advisory, please contact [AWS/Amazon] Security via the [vulnerability reporting page](https://aws.amazon.com/security/vulnerability-reporting) or directly via email to [aws-security@amazon.com](mailto:aws-security@amazon.com). Please do not create a public GitHub issue.\n\n### Acknowledgement\n\nAmazon Web Services Labs would like to thank Oleh Konko of 1seal for collaborating on this issue through the coordinated vulnerability disclosure process.",
"id": "GHSA-4v58-8p28-2rq3",
"modified": "2026-05-05T18:46:48Z",
"published": "2026-05-05T18:46:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/awslabs/tough/security/advisories/GHSA-4v58-8p28-2rq3"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-6967"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://aws.amazon.com/security/security-bulletins/2026-019-aws"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crates.io/crates/tough/0.22.0"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crates.io/crates/tuftool/0.15.0"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/awslabs/tough"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/awslabs/tough/releases/tag/tough-v0.22.0"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/awslabs/tough/releases/tag/tuftool-v0.15.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:L",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "awslabs/tough is Missing Delegated Metadata Validation"
}
GHSA-4V5X-9M47-CQR2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-12-09 21:31 – Updated: 2026-01-29 02:38Duplicate Advisory
This advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-5565-3c98-g6jc. This link is maintained to preserve external references.
Original Description
A vulnerability was found in OIDC-Client. When using the RH SSO OIDC adapter with EAP 7.x or when using the elytron-oidc-client subsystem with EAP 8.x, authorization code injection attacks can occur, allowing an attacker to inject a stolen authorization code into the attacker's own session with the client with a victim's identity. This is usually done with a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) or phishing attack.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.wildfly:wildfly-elytron-oidc-client-subsystem"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "34.0.1.Final"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-12-10T19:06:02Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-12-09T21:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "# Duplicate Advisory\nThis advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of [GHSA-5565-3c98-g6jc](https://advisory-inbox.githubapp.com/advisory_reviews/GHSA-5565-3c98-g6jc). This link is maintained to preserve external references.\n\n# Original Description\nA vulnerability was found in OIDC-Client. When using the RH SSO OIDC adapter with EAP 7.x or when using the elytron-oidc-client subsystem with EAP 8.x, authorization code injection attacks can occur, allowing an attacker to inject a stolen authorization code into the attacker\u0027s own session with the client with a victim\u0027s identity. This is usually done with a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) or phishing attack.",
"id": "GHSA-4v5x-9m47-cqr2",
"modified": "2026-01-29T02:38:40Z",
"published": "2024-12-09T21:31:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12369"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wildfly-security/wildfly-elytron/pull/2253"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wildfly-security/wildfly-elytron/pull/2261"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wildfly-security/wildfly-elytron/commit/5ac5e6bbcba58883b3cebb2ddbcec4de140c5ceb"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wildfly-security/wildfly-elytron/commit/d7754f5a6a91ceb0f4dbbbfe301991f6a55404cb"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:3989"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:3990"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:3992"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-12369"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2331178"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Duplicate Advisory: WildFly Elytron OpenID Connect Client Extension authorization code injection attack",
"withdrawn": "2025-03-25T21:48:41Z"
}
GHSA-4W53-6JVP-GG52
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-05-14 22:31 – Updated: 2024-05-15 14:10Summary
The way the proxy protocol listener is implemented in sshpiper can allow an attacker to forge their connecting address.
Details
This commit added the proxy protocol listener as the only listener in sshpiper, with no option to toggle this functionality off. This means that any connection that sshpiper is directly (or in some cases indirectly) exposed to can use proxy protocol to forge its source address.
PoC
You can use a configuration like this in HAProxy:
listen w-send-proxy
mode tcp
log global
option tcplog
bind *:27654
tcp-request connection set-src ipv4(1.1.1.1)
server app1 ssh-piper-hostname:22 send-proxy
When connecting through HAProxy, sshpiper will log connections as originating from 1.1.1.1. The proxy protocol data is designed to survive multiple load balancers or proxies and pass through to sshpiper at the end, so it should only be enabled trusted environments. This should be behind a configuration option or startup flag to prevent abuse when public connections can be made to sshpiper.
This is also backed up by the specification for proxy protocol:
The receiver MUST be configured to only receive the protocol described in this specification and MUST not try to guess whether the protocol header is present or not. This means that the protocol explicitly prevents port sharing between public and private access. Otherwise it would open a major security breach by allowing untrusted parties to spoof their connection addresses. The receiver SHOULD ensure proper access filtering so that only trusted proxies are allowed to use this protocol.
Impact
Any users of sshpiper who need logs from it for whitelisting/rate limiting/security investigations could have them become much less useful if an attacker is sending a spoofed source address.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/tg123/sshpiper"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.0.50"
},
{
"fixed": "1.3.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-35175"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-05-14T22:31:14Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-05-14T22:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe way the proxy protocol listener is implemented in sshpiper can allow an attacker to forge their connecting address.\n\n### Details\n\n[This commit](https://github.com/tg123/sshpiper/commit/2ddd69876a1e1119059debc59fe869cb4e754430) added the proxy protocol listener as the only listener in sshpiper, with no option to toggle this functionality off. This means that any connection that sshpiper is directly (or in some cases indirectly) exposed to can use proxy protocol to forge its source address.\n\n### PoC\n\nYou can use a configuration like this in HAProxy:\n\n```\nlisten w-send-proxy\n mode tcp\n log global\n option tcplog\n bind *:27654\n tcp-request connection set-src ipv4(1.1.1.1)\n server app1 ssh-piper-hostname:22 send-proxy\n```\n\nWhen connecting through HAProxy, sshpiper will log connections as originating from `1.1.1.1`. The proxy protocol data is designed to survive multiple load balancers or proxies and pass through to sshpiper at the end, so it should only be enabled trusted environments. This should be behind a configuration option or startup flag to prevent abuse when public connections can be made to sshpiper.\n\nThis is also backed up by [the specification for proxy protocol](https://www.haproxy.org/download/1.8/doc/proxy-protocol.txt):\n\n\u003e The receiver MUST be configured to only receive the protocol described in this\nspecification and MUST not try to guess whether the protocol header is present\nor not. This means that the protocol explicitly prevents port sharing between\npublic and private access. Otherwise it would open a major security breach by\nallowing untrusted parties to spoof their connection addresses. The receiver\nSHOULD ensure proper access filtering so that only trusted proxies are allowed\nto use this protocol.\n\n### Impact\n\nAny users of sshpiper who need logs from it for whitelisting/rate limiting/security investigations could have them become much less useful if an attacker is sending a spoofed source address.",
"id": "GHSA-4w53-6jvp-gg52",
"modified": "2024-05-15T14:10:45Z",
"published": "2024-05-14T22:31:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/tg123/sshpiper/security/advisories/GHSA-4w53-6jvp-gg52"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-35175"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/tg123/sshpiper/commit/2ddd69876a1e1119059debc59fe869cb4e754430"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/tg123/sshpiper/commit/70fb830dca26bea7ced772ce5d834a3e88ae7f53"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/tg123/sshpiper"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "sshpiper\u0027s enabling of proxy protocol without proper feature flagging allows faking source address"
}
GHSA-4WX6-WJ3Q-MF77
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-03 12:31 – Updated: 2026-03-03 12:31A vulnerability was found in Dataease SQLBot up to 1.5.1. This impacts the function validateEmbedded of the file backend/apps/system/middleware/auth.py of the component JWT Token Handler. Performing a manipulation results in improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack can be initiated remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitability is said to be difficult. The exploit has been made public and could be used. A comment in the source code warns users about using this feature. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-15598"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345",
"CWE-347"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-03T10:16:05Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in Dataease SQLBot up to 1.5.1. This impacts the function validateEmbedded of the file backend/apps/system/middleware/auth.py of the component JWT Token Handler. Performing a manipulation results in improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack can be initiated remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitability is said to be difficult. The exploit has been made public and could be used. A comment in the source code warns users about using this feature. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.",
"id": "GHSA-4wx6-wj3q-mf77",
"modified": "2026-03-03T12:31:27Z",
"published": "2026-03-03T12:31:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-15598"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/yaowenxiao721/Poc/blob/main/SQLBot/SQLBot-JWT-Signature-Verification-Bypass.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.348292"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.348292"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.707291"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X34-W43G-2CFC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:09 – Updated: 2022-05-17 04:09** DISPUTED ** Mobile Devices (aka MDI) C4 OBD-II dongles with firmware 2.x and 3.4.x, as used in Metromile Pulse and other products, do not validate firmware updates, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by specifying an update server. NOTE: the vendor states "This was a flaw for the developer/debugging devices, and was fixed in production version about 3 years ago."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-2908"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-08-23T21:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "** DISPUTED ** Mobile Devices (aka MDI) C4 OBD-II dongles with firmware 2.x and 3.4.x, as used in Metromile Pulse and other products, do not validate firmware updates, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by specifying an update server. NOTE: the vendor states \"This was a flaw for the developer/debugging devices, and was fixed in production version about 3 years ago.\"",
"id": "GHSA-4x34-w43g-2cfc",
"modified": "2022-05-17T04:09:22Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T04:09:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-2908"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.usenix.org/conference/woot15/workshop-program/presentation/foster"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/209512"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/CKIG-9ZAQGX"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-4X5Q-Q7WC-Q22P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-18 15:54 – Updated: 2023-11-02 17:33Impact
The vulnerability affects the endpoint /v2/pkgs/tools/installed. A user who has the ability to perform HTTP requests to the localhost interface, or is able to bypass the CORS configuration, can escalate his privileges to those of the user running the Arduino Create Agent service via a crafted HTTP POST request.
Further details are available in the references.
Fixed Version
1.3.3
References
The issue was reported by Nozomi Networks Labs. Further details are available at the following URL: * https://www.nozominetworks.com/blog/security-flaws-affect-a-component-of-the-arduino-create-cloud-ide
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/arduino/arduino-create-agent"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.3.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-43800"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-10-18T15:54:26Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-10-18T22:15:09Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\nThe vulnerability affects the endpoint `/v2/pkgs/tools/installed`. A user who has the ability to perform HTTP requests to the localhost interface, or is able to bypass the CORS configuration, can escalate his privileges to those of the user running the Arduino Create Agent service via a crafted HTTP POST request.\nFurther details are available in the references.\n\n### Fixed Version\n* `1.3.3`\n\n### References\nThe issue was reported by Nozomi Networks Labs. Further details are available at the following URL:\n* https://www.nozominetworks.com/blog/security-flaws-affect-a-component-of-the-arduino-create-cloud-ide",
"id": "GHSA-4x5q-q7wc-q22p",
"modified": "2023-11-02T17:33:32Z",
"published": "2023-10-18T15:54:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/arduino/arduino-create-agent/security/advisories/GHSA-4x5q-q7wc-q22p"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-43800"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/arduino/arduino-create-agent"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/arduino/arduino-create-agent/releases/tag/1.3.3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.nozominetworks.com/blog/security-flaws-affect-a-component-of-the-arduino-create-cloud-ide"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Arduino Create Agent Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-111: JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)
An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website.
CAPEC-141: Cache Poisoning
An attacker exploits the functionality of cache technologies to cause specific data to be cached that aids the attackers' objectives. This describes any attack whereby an attacker places incorrect or harmful material in cache. The targeted cache can be an application's cache (e.g. a web browser cache) or a public cache (e.g. a DNS or ARP cache). Until the cache is refreshed, most applications or clients will treat the corrupted cache value as valid. This can lead to a wide range of exploits including redirecting web browsers towards sites that install malware and repeatedly incorrect calculations based on the incorrect value.
CAPEC-142: DNS Cache Poisoning
A domain name server translates a domain name (such as www.example.com) into an IP address that Internet hosts use to contact Internet resources. An adversary modifies a public DNS cache to cause certain names to resolve to incorrect addresses that the adversary specifies. The result is that client applications that rely upon the targeted cache for domain name resolution will be directed not to the actual address of the specified domain name but to some other address. Adversaries can use this to herd clients to sites that install malware on the victim's computer or to masquerade as part of a Pharming attack.
CAPEC-148: Content Spoofing
An adversary modifies content to make it contain something other than what the original content producer intended while keeping the apparent source of the content unchanged. The term content spoofing is most often used to describe modification of web pages hosted by a target to display the adversary's content instead of the owner's content. However, any content can be spoofed, including the content of email messages, file transfers, or the content of other network communication protocols. Content can be modified at the source (e.g. modifying the source file for a web page) or in transit (e.g. intercepting and modifying a message between the sender and recipient). Usually, the adversary will attempt to hide the fact that the content has been modified, but in some cases, such as with web site defacement, this is not necessary. Content Spoofing can lead to malware exposure, financial fraud (if the content governs financial transactions), privacy violations, and other unwanted outcomes.
CAPEC-218: Spoofing of UDDI/ebXML Messages
An attacker spoofs a UDDI, ebXML, or similar message in order to impersonate a service provider in an e-business transaction. UDDI, ebXML, and similar standards are used to identify businesses in e-business transactions. Among other things, they identify a particular participant, WSDL information for SOAP transactions, and supported communication protocols, including security protocols. By spoofing one of these messages an attacker could impersonate a legitimate business in a transaction or could manipulate the protocols used between a client and business. This could result in disclosure of sensitive information, loss of message integrity, or even financial fraud.
CAPEC-384: Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages. Performing this attack can allow the attacker to gain unauthorized privileges within the application, or conduct attacks such as phishing, deceptive strategies to spread malware, or traditional web-application attacks. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to perform adversary-in-the-middle (CAPEC-94) communications between the web browser and the remote system. Despite the use of AiTH software, the attack is actually directed at the server, as the client is one node in a series of content brokers that pass information along to the application framework. Additionally, it is not true "Adversary-in-the-Middle" attack at the network layer, but an application-layer attack the root cause of which is the master applications trust in the integrity of code supplied by the client.
CAPEC-385: Transaction or Event Tampering via Application API Manipulation
An attacker hosts or joins an event or transaction within an application framework in order to change the content of messages or items that are being exchanged. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that look authentic but may contain deceptive links, substitute one item or another, spoof an existing item and conduct a false exchange, or otherwise change the amounts or identity of what is being exchanged. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to man-in-the-middle communications between the web browser and the remote system in order to change the content of various application elements. Often, items exchanged in game can be monetized via sales for coin, virtual dollars, etc. The purpose of the attack is for the attack to scam the victim by trapping the data packets involved the exchange and altering the integrity of the transfer process.
CAPEC-386: Application API Navigation Remapping
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of links/buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains links/buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination. Some applications make navigation remapping more difficult to detect because the actual HREF values of images, profile elements, and links/buttons are masked. One example would be to place an image in a user's photo gallery that when clicked upon redirected the user to an off-site location. Also, traditional web vulnerabilities (such as CSRF) can be constructed with remapped buttons or links. In some cases navigation remapping can be used for Phishing attacks or even means to artificially boost the page view, user site reputation, or click-fraud.
CAPEC-387: Navigation Remapping To Propagate Malicious Content
An adversary manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages and thereby circumvent the expected application logic.
CAPEC-388: Application API Button Hijacking
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination.
CAPEC-665: Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws
An adversary leverages a firmware weakness within the Thunderbolt protocol, on a computing device to manipulate Thunderbolt controller firmware in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the implementation of authorization and verification schemes within Thunderbolt protection mechanisms. Upon gaining physical access to a target device, the adversary conducts high-level firmware manipulation of the victim Thunderbolt controller SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) flash, through the use of a SPI Programing device and an external Thunderbolt device, typically as the target device is booting up. If successful, this allows the adversary to modify memory, subvert authentication mechanisms, spoof identities and content, and extract data and memory from the target device. Currently 7 major vulnerabilities exist within Thunderbolt protocol with 9 attack vectors as noted in the Execution Flow.
CAPEC-701: Browser in the Middle (BiTM)
An adversary exploits the inherent functionalities of a web browser, in order to establish an unnoticed remote desktop connection in the victim's browser to the adversary's system. The adversary must deploy a web client with a remote desktop session that the victim can access.