| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| InDesign Desktop versions 20.5.2, 21.2 and earlier are affected by a Heap-based Buffer Overflow vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. |
| Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by an attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field. |
| InDesign Desktop versions 20.5.2, 21.2 and earlier are affected by an out-of-bounds write vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. |
| InDesign Desktop versions 20.5.2, 21.2 and earlier are affected by an out-of-bounds read vulnerability when parsing a crafted file, which could result in a read past the end of an allocated memory structure. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. |
| InDesign Desktop versions 20.5.2, 21.2 and earlier are affected by a Use After Free vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. |
| Acrobat Reader versions 26.001.21411, 24.001.30360, 24.001.30362 and earlier are affected by an Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution') vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file. |
| A heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Fortinet FortiAnalyzer Cloud 7.6.2 through 7.6.4, FortiManager Cloud 7.6.2 through 7.6.4 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code or commands via specifically crafted requests. Successful exploitation would require a large amount of effort in preparation because of ASLR and network segmentation |
| An improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiAnalyzer 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiAnalyzer 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiAnalyzer 7.2 all versions, FortiAnalyzer 7.0 all versions, FortiAnalyzer Cloud 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiAnalyzer Cloud 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiAnalyzer Cloud 7.2 all versions, FortiAnalyzer Cloud 7.0 all versions, FortiManager 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiManager 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiManager 7.2 all versions, FortiManager 7.0 all versions, FortiManager Cloud 7.6.0 through 7.6.4, FortiManager Cloud 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiManager Cloud 7.2 all versions, FortiManager Cloud 7.0 all versions may allow a privileged authenticated attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via JSON RPC API |
| A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.8 may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via <insert attack vector here> |
| A improper authentication vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSOAR PaaS 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiSOAR PaaS 7.5.0 through 7.5.2, FortiSOAR on-premise 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiSOAR on-premise 7.5.0 through 7.5.2 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to bypass authentication via replaying captured 2FA request. The attack requires being able to intercept and decrypt authentication traffic and precise timing to replay the request before token expiration, which raises the attack complexity. |
| A relative path traversal vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.1 through 7.4.12, FortiWeb 7.2.7 through 7.2.12, FortiWeb 7.0.10 through 7.0.12 may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via <insert attack vector here> |
| A path traversal: '../filedir' vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.5, FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.8 may allow attacker to escalation of privilege via <insert attack vector here> |
| A improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiClientEMS 7.4.0 through 7.4.5, FortiClientEMS 7.2.0 through 7.2.12, FortiClientEMS 7.0 all versions may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via sending crafted requests |
| A maliciously crafted HTML payload in an assembly variant name, when displayed during the delete confirmation dialog and clicked by a user, can trigger a Stored Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Autodesk Fusion desktop application. A malicious actor may leverage this vulnerability to read local files or execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process. |
| A maliciously crafted HTML payload, stored in a design name and exported to CSV, can trigger a Stored Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Autodesk Fusion desktop application. A malicious actor may leverage this vulnerability to read local files or execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process. |
| A maliciously crafted HTML payload in a component name, when displayed during the delete confirmation dialog and clicked by a user, can trigger a Stored Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Autodesk Fusion desktop application. A malicious actor may leverage this vulnerability to read local files or execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process. |
| The OECH1 prefix encoding is intended to obfuscate values across the OpenEdge platform. It has been identified as cryptographically weak and unsuitable for stored encodings and enterprise applications. OECH1 encodings should be considered exploitable and immediately replaced by any other supported prefix encoding, all of which are based on symmetric encryption. |
| In Eclipse Jetty, the HTTP/1.1 parser is vulnerable to request smuggling when chunk extensions are used, similar to the "funky chunks" techniques outlined here:
* https://w4ke.info/2025/06/18/funky-chunks.html
* https://w4ke.info/2025/10/29/funky-chunks-2.html
Jetty terminates chunk extension parsing at \r\n inside quoted strings instead of treating this as an error.
POST / HTTP/1.1
Host: localhost
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
1;ext="val
X
0
GET /smuggled HTTP/1.1
...
Note how the chunk extension does not close the double quotes, and it is able to inject a smuggled request. |
| Due to a Code Injection vulnerability in SAP NetWeaver Application Server Java (Web Dynpro Java), an unauthenticated attacker could supply crafted input that is interpreted by the application and causes it to reference attacker-controlled content. If a victim accesses the affected functionality, that attacker-controlled content could be executed in the victim�s browser, potentially resulting in session compromise. This could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary client-side code, impacting the confidentiality and integrity of the application, with no impact to availability. |
| Microsoft Office Excel 2000 SP3, 2002 SP3, 2003 SP3, and 2007 SP1; Excel Viewer 2003 Gold and SP3; Excel Viewer; Compatibility Pack for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007 File Formats SP1; and Excel in Microsoft Office 2004 and 2008 for Mac allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted Excel document that triggers an access attempt on an invalid object, as exploited in the wild in February 2009 by Trojan.Mdropper.AC. |
