Server-side request forgery in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway (versions before 9.5.0) lets a remote, unauthenticated attacker make the gateway issue crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations by simply delivering a message whose content references external resources - no credentials and no victim interaction are required. The vendor rates this 9.1 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N); our independent assessment concurs on the low exploitation barrier but bounds confidentiality impact to whatever internal endpoints are reachable from the gateway's server-side position and lowers integrity impact accordingly. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and the flaw is not confirmed as actively exploited (CISA KEV); a vendor patch is available in 9.5.0.
Authentication bypass in the YunoHost-packaged SOGo application (sogo_yhn) allows unauthenticated remote attackers to log in to any existing user account by supplying only that user's username together with an arbitrary password, rated CVSS 9.2. The root cause is the package's default configuration of SOGoTrustProxyAuthentication=YES, which causes SOGo to skip password verification during HTTP Basic authentication; every package version prior to 5.8.0~ynh9 is vulnerable by default, so exposed instances are broadly at risk. No public exploit code or exploitation telemetry has been identified at time of analysis, but the bypass requires no specialized tooling beyond knowing a valid username (typically derivable from email addresses), and the vendor has released a fixed version.
Man-in-the-middle attackers can impersonate the OPC UA server to Apache PLC4X (PLC4J) client applications and read, forge or modify secure-channel traffic - including the user credentials the client sends - affecting versions 0.9.0 through 0.13.1, with the fix landing in 1.0.0. Unauthenticated network attackers holding an on-path position (the AT:P requirement) benefit from insecure defaults: the security policy defaults to None in every affected release, 0.9.0-0.11.0 only log failed message-signature checks and never verify the server certificate taken from the unauthenticated GetEndpoints response, while 0.12.0-0.13.1 invert the signature check (rejecting valid signatures and accepting invalid ones) and accept server certificates with no trust anchor; from 0.12.0 the driver also silently continues at a weaker policy than configured, and from 0.13.0 endpoint selection prefers the weakest matching endpoint. Rated 9.2 (Critical) under CVSS 4.0 and high-severity under the independent CVSS 3.1 assessment (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/C:H/I:H/A:H); no public exploit code identified at time of analysis.
Path traversal in DB-GPT 0.7.5 and 0.8.0 lets remote attackers write arbitrary files outside the intended upload workspace through the OpenAPI python_file_upload endpoint at packages/dbgpt-app/src/dbgpt_app/openapi/api_v1/python_upload_api.py:42. The affected service is the DB-GPT web API and the vector is rated critical (CVSS 9.1, AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N), so exploitation hinges on network reachability of the instance rather than on any attacker-held credentials - DB-GPT ships its API without enforced authentication by default, which is why the score is PR:N. There is no confirmed active exploitation (not listed in CISA KEV) and no public exploit identified at time of analysis; EPSS is low at 0.47% (38th percentile), so this is a genuine but not yet mass-exploited issue. Note a scoring divergence: NVD rates confidentiality and integrity high with no availability impact, while our independent assessment rates integrity and availability high and confidentiality none.
Path traversal in the skill_upload API handler of DB-GPT 0.8.0 (packages/dbgpt-app/src/dbgpt_app/openapi/api_v1/agentic_data_api.py:40) lets a remote attacker supply a crafted upload path and write files outside the intended workspace or storage directory. The provider-assigned CVSS is 9.1 and the supplied vector indicates no authentication prerequisite (PR:N), but our independent assessment scores it AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L - integrity is the dominant impact, with limited availability effects and no confirmed confidentiality loss, and the practical attack surface depends heavily on whether the skill_upload endpoint is reachable without authentication in a given deployment. Exploitation status is unconfirmed: the CVE is not in CISA KEV, no public exploit code has been confirmed (EPSS 0.47%, 38th percentile), and no vendor-released patch was identified at time of analysis.
Server-side request forgery in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before 9.5.0 allows a remote, unauthenticated sender to embed URLs in message content that the gateway then fetches server-side and reflects back, exposing internal services and cloud instance metadata to the attacker. Because the gateway processes inbound mail from untrusted senders as its normal operating mode, no credentials or user interaction are required beyond delivering a crafted message to a protected recipient, and the confidentiality impact is high whenever the appliance runs on a cloud instance with an attached IAM role. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis; the issue is nevertheless high priority given the unauthenticated network vector, with our independent assessment scoring integrity impact as Low (reflecting that state changes depend on which internal endpoint is reachable) rather than the published vector's High.
Unauthenticated server-side request forgery in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before version 9.5.0 lets a remote attacker cause the gateway itself to send crafted requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations by simply sending an inbound message that triggers an online certificate status check. Because the request originates from the gateway's own network position, an attacker can potentially reach internal services that are not directly exposed, leading to sensitive information disclosure and, depending on reachable targets, disruption of gateway availability. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and the vulnerability is not confirmed as actively exploited (no CISA KEV listing); exploitation is nevertheless trivially reachable since it requires no authentication and no user interaction (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H, score 9.1), with realized impact bounded by the gateway's internal network position and egress restrictions.
Server-side request forgery in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway before 9.5.0 allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H, 9.1) to make the gateway fetch attacker-chosen URLs by embedding a crafted certificate revocation list reference in an inbound message. Successful exploitation yields disclosure of information reachable from the gateway's network position or disruption of gateway availability, but no write access or code execution (I:N), so practical severity is bounded by what internal or cloud-metadata endpoints the appliance can actually reach - landing it in the medium operational-priority band despite the critical base score. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and there is no confirmed active exploitation (CISA KEV).
Server-side request forgery in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway (all versions before 9.5.0) lets a remote, unauthenticated attacker who can deliver an inbound message cause the gateway to issue crafted HTTP requests to internal or otherwise unintended network destinations, with the trigger occurring during the gateway's issuer-certificate retrieval step. With CVSS 3.1 base score 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H), a successful attack can disclose sensitive internal information reachable from the gateway's network position and/or disrupt gateway operation, but the practical impact is bounded by which internal services and metadata endpoints the gateway can reach and by whether any response data is reflected back to the attacker rather than being blind. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and the issue is not confirmed actively exploited (no CISA KEV), though the combination of network reachability, no authentication, and no user interaction makes this a genuine priority within the email security gateway niche.
Directory traversal in Bisheng 2.3.0, 2.4.0, and 2.4.0-beta1 lets a remote attacker use crafted filename/path input to break out of the intended download/cache directory through the save_download_file routine (src/backend/bisheng/core/cache/utils.py:290), yielding arbitrary file read and write with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N). The vector indicates an unauthenticated, network-reachable attack with no user interaction, though the practical limiting factor is whether the API route that reaches save_download_file is exposed without a login - defenders should verify that against their own deployment before assuming unauthenticated reachability. Exploitation status: no public exploit identified at time of analysis, and there is no CISA KEV entry; EPSS is 0.33% (24th percentile), so mass exploitation is not currently expected, but the impact per successful attack is severe given the high confidentiality and integrity ratings and the absence of any availability impact.
WS-Security policy bypass in Apache WSS4J (4.0.0 <4.0.2, 3.0.0 <3.0.6, and 0 <2.4.4) allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to exploit EncryptedHeader child confusion so that an attacker-controlled plaintext element is promoted as the decrypted header, undermining confidentiality coverage and enabling WS-SecurityPolicy bypass. Per the CVSS 3.1 vector CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N (9.1), the flaw is network-reachable with low complexity, requires no authentication and no user interaction, and can affect both confidentiality and integrity - typically through Apache CXF-based SOAP services that decrypt EncryptedHeader elements and enforce WS-SecurityPolicy. Exposure is limited to deployments that actually rely on encrypted SOAP headers and policy enforcement; services not using WS-Security header confidentiality are not meaningfully exposed, and no public exploit code was identified at time of analysis.
Meta Horizon OS versions prior to v74.0.0.878.1682 allow a locally installed malicious application that has been granted notification-access to impersonate the privileged com.oculus.vrshell package - and any other package signed with the same signing key - against OS endpoints that authenticate callers via CallerIdentity, producing high confidentiality and integrity impact. The root cause is an improper communication-channel restriction (CWE-923) in MediaSyncJobReceiver, which can be induced to send a privileged PendingIntent carrying a com.oculus.vrshell CallerIdentity to any application registered as a NotificationListenerService. Although the supplied NVD score is 9.1 with an AV:N vector, the realistic attack path is a local, on-device app-to-app attack that requires an attacker-controlled listener already resident on the device; EPSS is low (0.23%, 13th percentile) and no confirmed active exploitation (CISA KEV) or public exploit code was identified at time of analysis.
Authenticated server-side request forgery in Tugtainer before version 1.30.6 allows any logged-in user with access to notification settings to make the backend send outbound HTTP requests to attacker-chosen URLs through the /settings/test_notification endpoint, reaching localhost, RFC1918 ranges, and cloud metadata addresses such as 169.254.169.254. The urls field is passed directly to the Apprise notification library with no scheme, hostname, private-IP, or metadata filtering in the default configuration, and because responses are not returned to the caller the attack is blind, which limits it to internal port scanning, service probing, and indirect information inference rather than straightforward data exfiltration. Our independent assessment agrees with the SSRF class and the authentication prerequisite (PR:L) but rates the CIA impact lower (C:L/I:L/A:L) than the vendor's 9.1 scoring, so the practical severity sits below the headline score; vendor-released patch: 1.30.6, and no public exploit identified at time of analysis, with no CISA KEV listing.
Unauthenticated firmware replacement on PTZOptics PTZ cameras and the vendor's Firmware Upgrade Tool lets anyone who can reach the device's update endpoint flash a modified firmware image onto the hardware, handing the attacker persistent control of the camera without ever supplying administrator credentials. Rated CVSS 9.1 (CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N with full confidentiality, integrity and availability impact), the missing-authentication flaw (CWE-306) covers the Move/Link/Studio 4K and SE families below their respective fix builds, every Generation-2 camera (PT12X/PT20X/PT30X SDI/NDI/USB, ZCAM variants, Studio Pro) at all versions, and all versions of the Upgrade Tool. No public exploit code has been identified and the issue is not confirmed actively exploited (no CISA KEV listing) at time of analysis, but because exploitation is unauthenticated and needs no user interaction the only real gating factor is network reachability - these cameras normally sit on AV/production VLANs rather than the public internet, so an attacker must first gain a foothold on the same segment and then craft a firmware image the device accepts.
Authentication bypass in the GiveWP WordPress donation plugin (all versions through 4.16.9) allows remote, unauthenticated attackers to satisfy the plugin's credential/equivalence check with crafted input and reach privileged plugin functionality on any affected site. Scoring CVSS 3.1 base 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N), exploitation requires only that the plugin be installed and reachable - no account, no privileges, and no victim interaction - with high confidentiality and integrity impact, which makes automated scanning of WordPress installs a realistic attack model. No public exploit code and no confirmed active exploitation (CISA KEV) were identified at time of analysis, and no EPSS score was supplied, so priority should be driven by the severity and trivial preconditions rather than observed exploitation.
Cross-workspace authentication bypass in Soft Machine 0.2.247 and earlier lets an authenticated paying tenant read, modify, and destructively restore another tenant's workspace through its HTTP API. Two helper functions in /app/server.js, verifyContainerAuth() and authenticateWorkspaceHttp(), accept the app-wide CONTAINER_SHARED_SECRET as a bearer token without validating which workspace the caller owns, bypassing the per-workspace workspaceTokenMatches check; because that secret is identical on every container and readable from the tenant's own process environment, the multi-tenancy isolation boundary collapses. Exploitation requires a valid paid account, adjacency to the target workspace API (AV:A), and no user interaction; no public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and no vendor-released patch is available, so this is assessed at CVSS 9.0 as a genuine high-priority multi-tenancy isolation failure.
Unauthenticated remote code execution in the AcyMailing SMTP Newsletter WordPress plugin (versions 11.0.5 and earlier) allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code on the underlying server, leading to full site compromise. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 9.0 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating no authentication or user interaction is required, though the high attack complexity (AC:H) signals that reliable exploitation likely depends on a specific precondition, application state, or configuration that the attacker must arrange or wait for. No public exploit code is currently identified, and the vulnerability is not listed in CISA KEV.
Apache WSS4J versions 4.0.0 through 4.0.1, 3.0.0 through 3.0.5, and all 2.x releases before 2.4.4 can accept SOAP messages in which a required element was never signed or encrypted, because the StAX streaming WS-SecurityPolicy validator converts relative or otherwise unsupported XPath expressions into paths that never match the real XML element path. The result is a fail-open integrity failure: a remote, unauthenticated SOAP peer (CVSS 3.1 AV:N/PR:N/UI:N) can send a policy-required element without the expected signature or encryption and the validator will not object. Exploitation is conditional on the deployment using WSS4J's StAX/streaming policy validator with a security policy whose SignedElements, EncryptedElements, or RequiredElements assertions use relative or unsupported XPath; our independent assessment rates the exploit vector AC:H and limits impact to integrity (I:H) with no confidentiality or availability effect, well below the vendor's 9.1 score, and no public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis.