| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Tugtainer is a self-hosted app for automating updates of Docker containers. Prior to version 1.31.3, when the OIDC login flow completes, backend/modules/auth/providers/auth_oidc_provider.py decodes the id_token returned by the identity provider's token endpoint using jose.jwt.get_unverified_claims() instead of jwt.decode(). This skips signature verification, audience (aud) validation, issuer (iss) validation, and expiry (exp) checking entirely. The extracted claims (email/sub/preferred_username) are then used directly as the user_id for the resulting Tugtainer session. This issue has been patched in version 1.31.3. |
| The device's update mechanism includes conditions that allow unauthorized software packages to be accepted as authentic. During the boot process, the stock done function disables signature verification in the OPKG configuration before restoring optional packages from a writable, unsigned feed. Separately, the publicly distributed SDK contains the production private key whose corresponding public key is trusted by both stable and beta firmware builds. Either issue undermines package authenticity, and together they allow an attacker to provide packages that appear valid to the system. Even if signature enforcement is restored, the exposed production key enables an attacker to generate signatures that the device will continue to trust. An attacker who can supply a malicious package may be able to execute arbitrary code with root privileges during installation. |
| Contrast is a Kubernetes runtime for confidential containers. In versions before 1.12.1, the secure persistent volume feature is vulnerable to a malicious host supplying a crafted LUKS2 volume to a pod VM. LUKS2 volume metadata is not authenticated and, with cryptsetup versions prior to 2.8.1, a header specifying the null keyslot encryption algorithm (cipher_null-ecb) is accepted without error. Because the Contrast Initializer assumes a device is protected if `cryptsetup open` succeeds with the secret seed, the guest will open the attacker-supplied volume and write secret data in plaintext, or under a volume key known to the attacker, allowing the host to read confidential data that should have been encrypted. Contrast v1.12.1 ships cryptsetup 2.8.1, which disables null ciphers in keyslots when the passphrase is non-empty; v1.13.0 adds detached-header validation in guest memory and integrity protection for secure persistent storage. Contrast persistent volumes were not integrity protected, so integrity impact is not considered. |
| NVIDIA GPU Display Driver for Linux contains a vulnerability in the kernel mode layer where improper verification of cryptographic signatures may cause signature verification to be bypassed under memory pressure. A successful exploit of this vulnerability might lead to denial of service and data tampering. |
| UltrafastSecp256k1 is a high-performance, multi-backend secp256k1 engine with reproducible audit evidence, compatibility shims, and profile-based review scopes. Prior to version 4.2.0, UltrafastSecp256k1's ECDSA adaptor pre-signature verification accepts forged adaptor pre-signatures whose "r" value is not cryptographically bound to the adaptor point "T". This issue has been patched in version 4.2.0. |
| Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature and Improper Certificate Validation in the OPC UA driver of Apache PLC4X (PLC4J) allows an attacker in a network position between client and server to impersonate the OPC UA server and to read, forge or modify secure-channel traffic, including user credential ssent by the client.
The defect manifests differently depending on the version:
- In 0.9.0 through 0.11.0 a failed message-signature check is only logged and never enforced, and there is no mechanism to verify the server certificate: it is taken from the unauthenticated GetEndpoints discovery response and used to encrypt the user's password.
- In 0.12.0 through 0.13.1 the signature check is inverted (valid signatures are rejected, invalid ones accepted), and server certificates are accepted without a trust anchor by default.
- In all affected versions the default security policy is None. Starting with 0.12.0 the driver additionally continues silently at a weaker security policy than the one configured, and starting with 0.13.0 endpoint selection prefers the weakest matching endpoint.
Users checking only for one of these mechanisms may wrongly conclude they are unaffected.
This issue affects Apache PLC4X: from 0.9.0 before 1.0.0.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.0.0, which fixes the issue. Version 1.0.0 verifies message signatures correctly, refuses to connect unless the server certificate can be verified against a configured trust store or pinned certificate, defaults to Basic256Sha256 with SignAndEncrypt, and fails the
connection if the negotiated security policy is weaker than the configured one. |
| In Anjvision YSSD‑RTMP‑H5 firmware version 3.3.2.4, both the local and cloud update mechanisms apply new firmware without any cryptographic verification, relying only on basic hashing. This design allows an attacker who can reach the update routine to introduce untrusted firmware images that the device will accept as valid. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.13.0 until 2.14.0, HMACAlgorithm.from_jwk is affected because PyJWK verification path used the decoded key without applying prepare_key validation. This occurs when a trusted JWK Set contains an oct entry with an empty k value. As a result, an attacker signs an HMAC token with the same zero-length key accepted by PyJWT. Consequently, forged token can carry arbitrary authenticated claims. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| Zammad is a web based open source helpdesk/customer support system. Prior to 7.1.2, when Zammad checks the digital signature on an incoming S/MIME-signed email, it does not verify that the signing certificate is genuinely trusted, it only checks whether a certificate with a matching name is already stored in the system. An attacker can create their own certificate using the name of a real, previously trusted sender and use it to send a forged email. Zammad will display that email with the same "validly signed" indicator as a genuine message from the real sender, even though the attacker never had access to that sender's actual certificate or private key. This issue is fixed in version 7.1.2. |
| Authlib (v1.7.2 and below) contains a signature verification bypass vulnerability. The JsonWebSignature.deserialize_json() method accepts a JSON Serialization JWS object and returns the payload as successfully verified without checking for a signature and without requiring a cryptographic key. |
| Under WOLFSSL_SMALL_CERT_VERIFY, ProcessPeerCertParse() runs the certificate signature check separately from the parse to keep peak memory down, then merges the two results, but it merged the signature result back only when the parse returned 0, so any parse error hid it. ParseCertRelative() reaches its validity-date, name-constraint and critical-extension checks only after ConfirmSignature() has passed, so splitting the signature check out inverts the precedence that makes "override date errors" a sound policy, and ASN_SIG_CONFIRM_E is never surfaced anywhere. The attacker needs no key material from the real PKI and no CA compromise: a self-made certificate carrying the expected subject name, the trusted CA's subject as its issuer, arbitrary bytes where the signature goes, a validity window in the past and the attacker's own key pair is sufficient. Affected builds define WOLFSSL_SMALL_CERT_VERIFY, which is off by default, is not set implicitly by any platform or preset header, and is not reachable from any CMake option; the autotools routes are --enable-lowresource, --enable-leantls, --enable-tinytls13=cert and --enable-tinytls13=mutualauth, and examples/configs/user_settings_embedded.h reaches it through WC_CFG_SMALL_CERT_VERIFY, which ships as 0, while neither --enable-all nor --enable-distro enables it at all. The application must additionally install a verify callback through wolfSSL_CTX_set_verify() or wolfSSL_set_verify() with WOLFSSL_VERIFY_PEER that returns 1 for ASN_BEFORE_DATE_E or ASN_AFTER_DATE_E; wolfSSL ships this exact shape as myVerify() in wolfssl/test.h under VERIFY_OVERRIDE_DATE_ERR, which examples/client -D selects. An application with no callback, or whose callback returns preverify for date errors, still fails the handshake, and wolfSSL_CertManagerVerifyBuffer() and wc_CheckCertSignature() report ASN_SIG_CONFIRM_E correctly in the same binary. TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 are affected in both directions, and DTLS reaches the same function; where the forged certificate is a chain certificate the callback's consent causes it to be cached in the WOLFSSL_CTX certificate manager, so an exposed deployment must restart the context or the process rather than merely reconnect. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.13.0 until 2.14.0, HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key in jwt/algorithms.py is affected because raw-JWK detector does not normalize accepted Unicode byte-order marks before checking for JSON. This occurs when a public JWK is prefixed with a UTF-8 BOM and used in a mixed-algorithm verification path. As a result, public JWK bypasses asymmetric-key detection and becomes the HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated tokens. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.1.0 until 2.15.0, PyJWT OKPAlgorithm.from_jwk in jwt/algorithms.py is affected because private-JWK import path does not compare the public key derived from d with x. This occurs when an OKP private JWK supplies non-corresponding x and d components. As a result, identity derived from x can differ from operations performed with d. Consequently, if an integration also accepts private key parameters from a proof header without rejecting them, an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key. This issue is fixed in version 2.15.0. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.13.0 until 2.14.0, PyJWT HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key is affected because HMAC key guard only recognizes top-level public JWK forms and misses container representations. This occurs when an application allows HMAC and asymmetric algorithms and passes a public JWK container as the raw key. As a result, public asymmetric key material is accepted as the HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge a token with arbitrary authenticated claims. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. Prior to 2.14.0, is_pem_format in jwt/utils.py is affected because is_pem_format does not recognize every PEM representation accepted by the cryptography loader. This occurs when an application mixes HMAC and asymmetric algorithms and supplies a mutated public-key PEM as raw key bytes. As a result, HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key treats the unrecognized asymmetric public key as an HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| The VeloCloud Edge software update workflow may accept update bundles without properly validating their signatures because the workflow does not restrict the digest algorithm used for artifact verification. An attacker with either sufficient privileges to upload packages to VeloCloud Orchestrator or credentials permitting direct access to an Edge may be able to install unauthorized software. |
| PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. From 2.4.0 until 2.14.0, PyJWT HMACAlgorithm.prepare_key is affected because asymmetric-key guard relies on textual markers that are absent from DER encoding. This occurs when an application mixes HMAC and asymmetric algorithms and supplies a DER public key as the shared verification key. As a result, PyJWT uses public DER bytes as an HMAC secret. Consequently, an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0. |
| The Payment Gateway of Stripe for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature in all versions up to, and including, 5.0.8. This is due to the publicly accessible `woocommerce_api_wt_stripe` webhook endpoint (`EH_Stripe_Webhook_Handler::handle()`) wrapping the only call to `\Stripe\Webhook::constructEvent()` inside an `if (!empty($endpoint_secret))` guard that is never entered on default installations — because the `eh_stripe_webhook_secret` option is empty after a fresh plugin install — causing the raw, attacker-controlled POST body to be decoded and processed as a fully trusted Stripe event without any signature verification, authentication, or authorization. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to send forged Stripe webhook events to manipulate WooCommerce order statuses, including marking unpaid orders as paid or completed via `payment_complete()`, forcing legitimate orders into a failed state, fabricating dispute notifications, and injecting forged refund events. This vulnerability is only exploitable when the Stripe webhook signing secret has not been configured by an administrator; once a valid signing secret is saved, `\Stripe\Webhook::constructEvent()` is enforced and forged requests are rejected. |
| Python Social Auth is a social authentication/registration mechanism. Prior to version 5.0.0, the `vk-app` backend accepted VK application callback data without verifying the callback signature when the `auth_key` parameter was omitted. Applications using this backend could treat unsigned attacker-controlled data as a verified VK identity. An attacker could choose callback fields such as `viewer_id`, `access_token`, `api_id`, and `api_result`, potentially allowing authentication as an arbitrary VK user ID. The issue affects only applications using the `vk-app` backend. The issue has been fixed in version 5.0.0 by requiring `auth_key` to be present and valid before callback data is trusted. |
| Improper OCSP response validation in the Snowflake Python, Go, JDBC, and Node.js drivers allowed a revoked TLS certificate to be accepted as valid, because OCSP responses were not reliably bound to the certificate being validated and definitive verification failures were treated as transient. A man-in-the-middle attacker holding a revoked certificate and its private key for a Snowflake or stage hostname could cause the driver to establish a TLS session to the attacker-controlled endpoint anyway, allowing the attacker to read and modify data transmitted within that connection. Successful exploitation requires that on-path position and the corresponding private key, and impact is limited to data carried within the intercepted connection. The fix is available in Snowflake Connector for Python v4.7.3, Snowflake Go Driver v2.2.0, Snowflake JDBC Driver v4.3.4 (including the snowflake-jdbc-fips and snowflake-jdbc-thin), and Snowflake Node.js Driver v3.3.0. Users must manually upgrade. |
