Monthly
Python bytecode scanning gap in agentverus-scanner allows supply-chain attackers to smuggle malicious __pycache__ .pyc files past the tool's static and semantic analysis engines, which only inspect source .py files in companion code directories. Packages carrying malicious bytecode alongside benign source receive a CERTIFIED verdict with elevated trust scores, causing downstream environments that trust the scanner to silently execute attacker-controlled code on import. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, but the VulnCheck advisory and GitHub issue #27 document the bypass technique in sufficient detail for reproduction.
Incomplete file coverage in claude-skill-antivirus v2.1.3 allows malicious Claude skill packages to bypass security scanning entirely when installed from local directories. The scanner reads only the SKILL.md manifest file, leaving Python source (.py), bytecode (.pyc), and all other executable artifacts in the scripts/ subdirectory completely unanalyzed. Skill authors can embed arbitrary malicious payloads in non-manifest files and receive a SAFE verdict with a perfect 100/100 trust score, providing users with false assurance before installation.
Tencent AI-Infra-Guard's skill-scan component allows scanner bypass via hardcoded exclusion of Python compiled bytecode, enabling malicious skill packages to pass a false SAFE verdict and execute arbitrary code on operator hosts. Attackers supply a skill with benign `.py` source decoys alongside malicious `.pyc/.pyo/.pyd` bytecode in `__pycache__` directories; because three separate scanning surfaces in versions through v4.6.0 unconditionally skip these artifacts, the auditing LLM never sees the malicious payload. CPython's PEP 552 UNCHECKED_HASH behavior executes `.pyc` at import time regardless of source presence, triggering code execution when an operator installs the skill. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, but the upstream fix commit and GitHub Issue #531 confirm the flaw.
Protection mechanism failures in Cisco IOS XR Software allow remote unauthenticated attackers to achieve high availability disruption and limited integrity impact against affected routers. Discovered through Cisco's own internal security audit, this CVE bundles multiple CWE-693 class weaknesses addressed in a coordinated hardening release. No active exploitation has been identified, but the combination of network-reachability, no authentication requirement, and an A:H CVSS impact score makes this a high-priority patch for service-provider and carrier-grade router deployments.
Privilege escalation in Dell PowerStore enterprise storage appliances allows authenticated low-privileged users to bypass the platform's access control enforcement and gain elevated system privileges. Classified as CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure), the flaw resides in the protection layer governing role-based access within the PowerStore management stack, spanning at least ten appliance models from the 500T to the 7000T series. The CVSS 8.8 score reflects full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact, though network access with valid limited-privilege credentials is required; no public exploit code or active exploitation has been identified at time of analysis.
Privilege escalation in Dell PowerStore storage appliances allows any authenticated low-privilege user to bypass access restriction controls and gain elevated system privileges, classified under CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure). The entire PowerStore T-series and Q-series lineup is affected, with a network-accessible, low-complexity attack path requiring only a valid account. No public exploit code and no CISA KEV listing have been identified at time of analysis, though the high CVSS score and broad appliance coverage make this a material risk in enterprise storage environments.
Arbitrary file write in Dell PowerStore allows authenticated low-privileged users to write attacker-controlled content to arbitrary filesystem paths via a Protection Mechanism Failure (CWE-693). Exploitation requires only network access and limited credentials, making this a credible lateral movement or privilege escalation vector within storage environments. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, but the low complexity and low privilege bar make this a realistic threat against enterprise storage infrastructure.
Evidence-validation bypass in @hulumi/policies (npm) before 1.3.2 lets actors in a deployment pipeline suppress Cloudflare and deployment-governance policy violations by supplying unrelated but compliant-looking evidence. Because validators accepted stack-wide evidence shortcuts rather than correlating proof to the specific protected resource, evidence from one zone, hostname, origin, or repository could silence guardrails for a completely different resource in the same stack. No public exploit identified at time of analysis; the issue was reported by VulnCheck and fixed by correlating evidence to the protected resource in 1.3.2.
Privilege escalation in Sudo through 1.9.17p2 allows any local user holding a sudo rule to execute arbitrary commands when ptrace-based intercept mode is enabled. The intercept layer in exec_ptrace.c monitored only execve(2) system calls, leaving execveat(2) - and the fexecve libc wrapper built atop it - entirely uninspected, bypassing both policy enforcement and audit logging. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis; the upstream fix is available as a confirmed commit to the sudo-project repository.
Spring Security 7.1.0's InetAddressMatchers utility contains a flaw in its IP address classification logic - the matchInternal() and matchExternal() builders may incorrectly categorize certain IP addresses as belonging to internal or external networks, enabling unauthenticated remote attackers to bypass IP-based access controls under high-complexity conditions. Applications that rely on InetAddressMatchers to enforce network-level access restrictions are exposed to limited information disclosure where restricted endpoints or data may become accessible to external parties. No public exploit code exists and no CISA KEV listing is present, indicating no confirmed active exploitation at time of analysis.
Python bytecode scanning gap in agentverus-scanner allows supply-chain attackers to smuggle malicious __pycache__ .pyc files past the tool's static and semantic analysis engines, which only inspect source .py files in companion code directories. Packages carrying malicious bytecode alongside benign source receive a CERTIFIED verdict with elevated trust scores, causing downstream environments that trust the scanner to silently execute attacker-controlled code on import. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, but the VulnCheck advisory and GitHub issue #27 document the bypass technique in sufficient detail for reproduction.
Incomplete file coverage in claude-skill-antivirus v2.1.3 allows malicious Claude skill packages to bypass security scanning entirely when installed from local directories. The scanner reads only the SKILL.md manifest file, leaving Python source (.py), bytecode (.pyc), and all other executable artifacts in the scripts/ subdirectory completely unanalyzed. Skill authors can embed arbitrary malicious payloads in non-manifest files and receive a SAFE verdict with a perfect 100/100 trust score, providing users with false assurance before installation.
Tencent AI-Infra-Guard's skill-scan component allows scanner bypass via hardcoded exclusion of Python compiled bytecode, enabling malicious skill packages to pass a false SAFE verdict and execute arbitrary code on operator hosts. Attackers supply a skill with benign `.py` source decoys alongside malicious `.pyc/.pyo/.pyd` bytecode in `__pycache__` directories; because three separate scanning surfaces in versions through v4.6.0 unconditionally skip these artifacts, the auditing LLM never sees the malicious payload. CPython's PEP 552 UNCHECKED_HASH behavior executes `.pyc` at import time regardless of source presence, triggering code execution when an operator installs the skill. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, but the upstream fix commit and GitHub Issue #531 confirm the flaw.
Protection mechanism failures in Cisco IOS XR Software allow remote unauthenticated attackers to achieve high availability disruption and limited integrity impact against affected routers. Discovered through Cisco's own internal security audit, this CVE bundles multiple CWE-693 class weaknesses addressed in a coordinated hardening release. No active exploitation has been identified, but the combination of network-reachability, no authentication requirement, and an A:H CVSS impact score makes this a high-priority patch for service-provider and carrier-grade router deployments.
Privilege escalation in Dell PowerStore enterprise storage appliances allows authenticated low-privileged users to bypass the platform's access control enforcement and gain elevated system privileges. Classified as CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure), the flaw resides in the protection layer governing role-based access within the PowerStore management stack, spanning at least ten appliance models from the 500T to the 7000T series. The CVSS 8.8 score reflects full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact, though network access with valid limited-privilege credentials is required; no public exploit code or active exploitation has been identified at time of analysis.
Privilege escalation in Dell PowerStore storage appliances allows any authenticated low-privilege user to bypass access restriction controls and gain elevated system privileges, classified under CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure). The entire PowerStore T-series and Q-series lineup is affected, with a network-accessible, low-complexity attack path requiring only a valid account. No public exploit code and no CISA KEV listing have been identified at time of analysis, though the high CVSS score and broad appliance coverage make this a material risk in enterprise storage environments.
Arbitrary file write in Dell PowerStore allows authenticated low-privileged users to write attacker-controlled content to arbitrary filesystem paths via a Protection Mechanism Failure (CWE-693). Exploitation requires only network access and limited credentials, making this a credible lateral movement or privilege escalation vector within storage environments. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, but the low complexity and low privilege bar make this a realistic threat against enterprise storage infrastructure.
Evidence-validation bypass in @hulumi/policies (npm) before 1.3.2 lets actors in a deployment pipeline suppress Cloudflare and deployment-governance policy violations by supplying unrelated but compliant-looking evidence. Because validators accepted stack-wide evidence shortcuts rather than correlating proof to the specific protected resource, evidence from one zone, hostname, origin, or repository could silence guardrails for a completely different resource in the same stack. No public exploit identified at time of analysis; the issue was reported by VulnCheck and fixed by correlating evidence to the protected resource in 1.3.2.
Privilege escalation in Sudo through 1.9.17p2 allows any local user holding a sudo rule to execute arbitrary commands when ptrace-based intercept mode is enabled. The intercept layer in exec_ptrace.c monitored only execve(2) system calls, leaving execveat(2) - and the fexecve libc wrapper built atop it - entirely uninspected, bypassing both policy enforcement and audit logging. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis; the upstream fix is available as a confirmed commit to the sudo-project repository.
Spring Security 7.1.0's InetAddressMatchers utility contains a flaw in its IP address classification logic - the matchInternal() and matchExternal() builders may incorrectly categorize certain IP addresses as belonging to internal or external networks, enabling unauthenticated remote attackers to bypass IP-based access controls under high-complexity conditions. Applications that rely on InetAddressMatchers to enforce network-level access restrictions are exposed to limited information disclosure where restricted endpoints or data may become accessible to external parties. No public exploit code exists and no CISA KEV listing is present, indicating no confirmed active exploitation at time of analysis.