Monthly
Privilege escalation to proxy administrator with follow-on arbitrary command execution affects the LiteLLM proxy server (AI Gateway) from 1.87.0 up to the fixed releases 1.100.4, 1.101.3, 1.102.2, 1.103.1 and 1.104.0-rc.2. An authenticated account holding internal_user privileges can submit crafted metadata through the API-key creation flow so the proxy encrypts and returns a forged administrator credential, then replay that ciphertext as a bearer token to be trusted as a proxy admin and run commands via the MCP stdio endpoint. Versions after 1.91.0 are vulnerable in the default configuration, while 1.87.0 through 1.90.x are only exposed when EXPERIMENTAL_UI_LOGIN=true is explicitly set; CVSS 3.1 scores this 9.9 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H), the priority label is act_now, and no public exploit code or CISA KEV entry was identified at time of analysis.
Privilege escalation in the HIPAA Forms WordPress plugin (versions before 3.3.2) lets an account that already holds the plugin's own custom user role push that role up to administrator-level capabilities. The plugin handles a request that rebuilds its custom role without any capability check, so a role holder can rewrite their own permissions; per the assessed vector the attacker must be authenticated and must already possess that specific custom role (PR:H), making this an insider or role-holder escalation path rather than unauthenticated remote takeover, and no victim interaction is required. A public PoC reference exists but is not verified as working exploit code, there is no CISA KEV listing, and a vendor fix is available in 3.3.2.
Privilege escalation in the Grav Login plugin (3.6.0 before 3.9.13) allows page authors to obtain super-user accounts by defining an invitation form in page frontmatter and submitting the login.invite task without authentication. The missing authorization check requires an existing authenticated page-author foothold (PR:L) to plant the invitation form, so it is not exploitable by a fully anonymous outsider; no public exploit code or CISA KEV entry was identified at time of analysis. This is a credible, actionable privilege-escalation issue rather than a drop-everything remote-root flaw.
Privilege escalation in the Multicluster Global Hub Operator lets an attacker who already controls the operator or holds its service-account credentials impersonate arbitrary users, groups, and service accounts cluster-wide, then use that identity to obtain full administrative control. The issue is rated CVSS 3.1 7.2 HIGH (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and stems from an overly permissive RBAC configuration in multicluster-global-hub-operator-bundle. No CISA KEV listing, EPSS score, or public exploit code is present in the supplied data; no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
Improper privilege management in Cisco Snort 3 allows a locally authenticated low-privilege attacker to escalate privileges on affected deployments, including Cisco Secure Firewall Threat Defense, Cisco UTD Snort IPS Engine, Cisco Cyber Vision, and Open Source Snort 3 installations. Exploitation requires an existing local foothold (AV:L, PR:L) with no user interaction, so the practical risk is post-compromise privilege escalation or abuse of malicious low-privilege local accounts rather than remote attack. No public exploit identified at time of analysis; no CISA KEV active-exploitation confirmation was provided.
Unauthenticated privilege escalation in the WP User Manager WordPress plugin (versions 2.9.21 through 2.9.25) allows an attacker to submit a live paid registration form and receive its configured administrator-equivalent role once the associated payment gateway has been disconnected - the payment gate is silently dropped instead of failing closed. The flaw is rated CVSS 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/C:H/I:H/A:H, CWE-269), but practical exploitation requires the non-default combination of a published paid registration form that assigns a privileged role plus an inactive gateway, so sites that never offered paid registration, never mapped the form to a high-privilege role, or have unpublished the form are not exposed. Publicly available exploit code exists and the issue is fixed in 2.9.26; no KEV listing appears in the supplied intelligence.
Privilege escalation in the Simple Banner WordPress plugin before 3.3.3 lets any role that an administrator has permitted to manage banners gain the full 'administrator' capability, allowing an authenticated low-privileged user to take complete control of the site. The flaw is only reachable when an admin has explicitly delegated banner management to a non-administrator role and the attacker holds an account in that role - a non-default configuration reflected in the AC:H/PR:L vector - so default installs and unauthenticated visitors are not exposed. Publicly available exploit code exists and the vendor has released version 3.3.3 as a fix; no CISA KEV listing is associated with this CVE at time of analysis.
Trigger.dev before 4.6.0 exposes each environment's root TRIGGER_SECRET_KEY and other plaintext secrets through the GET /api/v1/projects/:projectRef/envvars endpoint, so an attacker holding a restricted read:envvars API key can escalate beyond that key's intended read-only scope. The affected environments are staging, production, and preview, and successful exploitation lets the attacker trigger tasks and mint admin public JWTs; exploitation requires a valid scoped key rather than anonymous access. This is a genuine priority rather than a high-score/low-real-risk issue, and no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
Takeover of the Oracle EDI Gateway component in Oracle E-Business Suite 12.2.3 through 12.2.15 is possible for a high-privileged attacker who can reach the application over HTTP, with full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact (CVSS 3.1 base 7.2, AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). The critical qualifier is the PR:H prerequisite: the attacker must already hold an elevated EDI Gateway account, so this is not exploitable by unauthenticated or low-privileged users and realistic exposure is confined to trusted operators or adversaries who have already stolen such credentials. No public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis, and no EPSS score was supplied in the source data.
Cross-tenant privilege escalation in StreamsHub Console for Apache Kafka allows an authenticated Kubernetes tenant that can create or modify Console custom resources to point spec.containers.api.spec.image at an arbitrary container image, which the operator then deploys into a pod running under a ServiceAccount bound by ClusterRoleBinding to cluster-wide Strimzi CRD read access, Kafka/KafkaRebalance patch rights, and cluster-monitoring-view. The attacker-controlled code reads the projected ServiceAccount token and gains read/write control over the Strimzi control plane across tenant boundaries, with high confidentiality and integrity impact (CVSS 9.9, scope changed). Exploitation is gated by the tenant-level RBAC permission rather than being open to the internet, and no public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis.
Privilege escalation to proxy administrator with follow-on arbitrary command execution affects the LiteLLM proxy server (AI Gateway) from 1.87.0 up to the fixed releases 1.100.4, 1.101.3, 1.102.2, 1.103.1 and 1.104.0-rc.2. An authenticated account holding internal_user privileges can submit crafted metadata through the API-key creation flow so the proxy encrypts and returns a forged administrator credential, then replay that ciphertext as a bearer token to be trusted as a proxy admin and run commands via the MCP stdio endpoint. Versions after 1.91.0 are vulnerable in the default configuration, while 1.87.0 through 1.90.x are only exposed when EXPERIMENTAL_UI_LOGIN=true is explicitly set; CVSS 3.1 scores this 9.9 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H), the priority label is act_now, and no public exploit code or CISA KEV entry was identified at time of analysis.
Privilege escalation in the HIPAA Forms WordPress plugin (versions before 3.3.2) lets an account that already holds the plugin's own custom user role push that role up to administrator-level capabilities. The plugin handles a request that rebuilds its custom role without any capability check, so a role holder can rewrite their own permissions; per the assessed vector the attacker must be authenticated and must already possess that specific custom role (PR:H), making this an insider or role-holder escalation path rather than unauthenticated remote takeover, and no victim interaction is required. A public PoC reference exists but is not verified as working exploit code, there is no CISA KEV listing, and a vendor fix is available in 3.3.2.
Privilege escalation in the Grav Login plugin (3.6.0 before 3.9.13) allows page authors to obtain super-user accounts by defining an invitation form in page frontmatter and submitting the login.invite task without authentication. The missing authorization check requires an existing authenticated page-author foothold (PR:L) to plant the invitation form, so it is not exploitable by a fully anonymous outsider; no public exploit code or CISA KEV entry was identified at time of analysis. This is a credible, actionable privilege-escalation issue rather than a drop-everything remote-root flaw.
Privilege escalation in the Multicluster Global Hub Operator lets an attacker who already controls the operator or holds its service-account credentials impersonate arbitrary users, groups, and service accounts cluster-wide, then use that identity to obtain full administrative control. The issue is rated CVSS 3.1 7.2 HIGH (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and stems from an overly permissive RBAC configuration in multicluster-global-hub-operator-bundle. No CISA KEV listing, EPSS score, or public exploit code is present in the supplied data; no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
Improper privilege management in Cisco Snort 3 allows a locally authenticated low-privilege attacker to escalate privileges on affected deployments, including Cisco Secure Firewall Threat Defense, Cisco UTD Snort IPS Engine, Cisco Cyber Vision, and Open Source Snort 3 installations. Exploitation requires an existing local foothold (AV:L, PR:L) with no user interaction, so the practical risk is post-compromise privilege escalation or abuse of malicious low-privilege local accounts rather than remote attack. No public exploit identified at time of analysis; no CISA KEV active-exploitation confirmation was provided.
Unauthenticated privilege escalation in the WP User Manager WordPress plugin (versions 2.9.21 through 2.9.25) allows an attacker to submit a live paid registration form and receive its configured administrator-equivalent role once the associated payment gateway has been disconnected - the payment gate is silently dropped instead of failing closed. The flaw is rated CVSS 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/C:H/I:H/A:H, CWE-269), but practical exploitation requires the non-default combination of a published paid registration form that assigns a privileged role plus an inactive gateway, so sites that never offered paid registration, never mapped the form to a high-privilege role, or have unpublished the form are not exposed. Publicly available exploit code exists and the issue is fixed in 2.9.26; no KEV listing appears in the supplied intelligence.
Privilege escalation in the Simple Banner WordPress plugin before 3.3.3 lets any role that an administrator has permitted to manage banners gain the full 'administrator' capability, allowing an authenticated low-privileged user to take complete control of the site. The flaw is only reachable when an admin has explicitly delegated banner management to a non-administrator role and the attacker holds an account in that role - a non-default configuration reflected in the AC:H/PR:L vector - so default installs and unauthenticated visitors are not exposed. Publicly available exploit code exists and the vendor has released version 3.3.3 as a fix; no CISA KEV listing is associated with this CVE at time of analysis.
Trigger.dev before 4.6.0 exposes each environment's root TRIGGER_SECRET_KEY and other plaintext secrets through the GET /api/v1/projects/:projectRef/envvars endpoint, so an attacker holding a restricted read:envvars API key can escalate beyond that key's intended read-only scope. The affected environments are staging, production, and preview, and successful exploitation lets the attacker trigger tasks and mint admin public JWTs; exploitation requires a valid scoped key rather than anonymous access. This is a genuine priority rather than a high-score/low-real-risk issue, and no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
Takeover of the Oracle EDI Gateway component in Oracle E-Business Suite 12.2.3 through 12.2.15 is possible for a high-privileged attacker who can reach the application over HTTP, with full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact (CVSS 3.1 base 7.2, AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). The critical qualifier is the PR:H prerequisite: the attacker must already hold an elevated EDI Gateway account, so this is not exploitable by unauthenticated or low-privileged users and realistic exposure is confined to trusted operators or adversaries who have already stolen such credentials. No public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis, and no EPSS score was supplied in the source data.
Cross-tenant privilege escalation in StreamsHub Console for Apache Kafka allows an authenticated Kubernetes tenant that can create or modify Console custom resources to point spec.containers.api.spec.image at an arbitrary container image, which the operator then deploys into a pod running under a ServiceAccount bound by ClusterRoleBinding to cluster-wide Strimzi CRD read access, Kafka/KafkaRebalance patch rights, and cluster-monitoring-view. The attacker-controlled code reads the projected ServiceAccount token and gains read/write control over the Strimzi control plane across tenant boundaries, with high confidentiality and integrity impact (CVSS 9.9, scope changed). Exploitation is gated by the tenant-level RBAC permission rather than being open to the internet, and no public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis.