Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in livebook-dev livebook allows an attacker to authenticate a victim's browser session under the attacker's own Livebook Teams identity. When Livebook is configured to use Livebook Teams for identity, Livebook.ZTA.LivebookTeams.handle_request/4 in lib/livebook/zta/livebook_teams.ex handles the OAuth-style callback carrying a teams_identity marker and a code parameter. The clause exchanges that code for an access token and writes the token into the browser session without verifying any value that ties the callback to the browser session that started the login. No state or nonce is generated when the flow is initiated: Livebook.Teams.Requests.create_auth_request/1 in lib/livebook/teams/requests.ex sends an empty request body, so no per-attempt value is ever registered, and the callback clause has nothing to compare against. An attacker who holds membership in the same Livebook Teams organisation as the target instance can therefore begin the login flow themselves, retain the resulting authorization code without redeeming it, and induce a victim to open a crafted URL carrying that code. The victim's browser completes the exchange and the resulting session is bound to the attacker's identity rather than the victim's. The victim is not required to hold any particular privilege, and no credential belonging to the victim is involved. The vulnerability does not allow the attacker to authenticate as the victim. The consequence is that a user believes they are working in their own authenticated session while they are in fact operating as another identity. Work performed in that session is attributed to the attacker's account, and secrets, uploaded data, or notebook results the victim produces are exposed to the attacker rather than kept in the victim's own account. The authorization code must be redeemed within a short window after the login flow begins, which constrains the timing of the attack but not its feasibility. This issue affects livebook: from 0.15.0 before 0.18.7 and from 0.19.0 before 0.19.9.

Relative Path Traversal vulnerability in livebook-dev livebook allows an attacker-authored notebook to write a file with attacker-controlled content to an arbitrary path. A .livemd notebook can declare file_entries metadata, each entry carrying a name. Every path that creates a file entry through the user interface validates that name with Livebook.Notebook.validate_file_entry_name/2, which requires a flat filename of alphanumerics, dashes, underscores and dots, ending in an extension. The import path does not: Livebook.LiveMarkdown.Import.file_entry_metadata_to_attrs/1 in lib/livebook/live_markdown/import.ex takes the name verbatim from the notebook source. For a URL-type file entry, Livebook.Session.file_entry_cache_file/2 in lib/livebook/session.ex resolves that name beneath the session's temporary directory without checking that the result stays inside it, and Livebook.FileSystem.Utils.resolve_unix_like_path/2 collapses parent-directory segments while clamping only at the filesystem root. When the entry's content is requested and no cached copy exists, Livebook fetches the entry's URL and writes the response body to the resolved path, creating parent directories as needed. The attacker therefore controls both the destination and the contents of the written file, which may land anywhere the Livebook process can write. The same missing containment check is present in Livebook.Session.to_attachment_file_entry/2. A victim who opens an attacker-supplied notebook and causes the entry to be fetched triggers the write within their own authenticated session; the attacker needs no account on the target instance. URL-type entries are also not placed under notebook stamping quarantine on import, so no warning is shown. This issue affects livebook: from 0.11.0 before 0.18.7 and from 0.19.0 before 0.19.9.

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. In versions prior to 1.6.58, the web_crawl tool performs its SSRF check only on the initially supplied URL, allowing the protection to be bypassed so the tool connects to attacker-chosen internal destinations. The check resolves the hostname once with socket.gethostbyname and rejects private/loopback/link-local results, but then passes the URL to a fetcher using httpx.Client(follow_redirects=True) (or urllib.request.urlopen when httpx is absent, which also follows redirects) that re-resolves the hostname at connect time with no further validation. This validate-here/fetch-there gap is exploitable through both HTTP redirects and DNS rebinding. If an attacker can influence URLs passed to web_crawl(), directly or through an agent/tool workflow, they can cause the PraisonAI host to fetch loopback, private-network, or cloud metadata endpoints reachable from that host, with the response body returned in the web_crawl() result. This issue has been fixed in version 1.6.58.

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. In versions 1.5.128 through 1.6.57, the praisonaiagents.tools.web_crawl_tools.web_crawl() function is vulnerable to server-side request forgery. While it validates the initially supplied URL and blocks direct loopback and private destinations, its default httpx fallback uses httpx.Client(follow_redirects=True) and does not revalidate intermediate or final redirect targets. An attacker who can influence a URL passed to web_crawl(), directly or through an agent or tool workflow, can supply an attacker-controlled public URL that passes the initial host check and then redirects to loopback, private-network, or cloud metadata endpoints reachable from the host, with the redirected response body returned in the web_crawl() result. This constitutes an incomplete fix and patch bypass for the previously disclosed web_crawl SSRF class (GHSA-qq9r-63f6-v542 / CVE-2026-40160 and GHSA-8f4v-xfm9-3244), since the guard validates only the requested URL and not the destination actually fetched after redirection. This issue has been fixed in version 1.6.58.

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. In versions 3.9.26 through 4.6.57 of praiseonai and 0.12.12 through 1.6.57 of praiseonaiagents, the workflow "include" feature is vulnerable to code execution. Workflow._execute_include() implicitly imports and runs an included recipe's tools.py via a raw importlib.util.spec_from_file_location() and spec.loader.exec_module() call, without honoring the PRAISONAI_ALLOW_TEMPLATE_TOOLS/PRAISONAI_ALLOW_LOCAL_TOOLS autoload opt-in gates or routing through the centralized safe loader that protects the other tools.py autoload paths. As a result, a workflow that includes an attacker-controlled local recipe directory executes arbitrary module-level Python code during include setup, before any child workflow parsing or model call, and the same sink is reachable through the higher-level praisonai.recipe.run() recipe API. An attacker who can cause a victim process to run a workflow or recipe that includes an untrusted local recipe achieves arbitrary Python code execution as the PraisonAI process user, a variant that bypasses the hardening applied to the previously disclosed automatic tools.py RCE advisory family. This issue has been fixed in version 4.6.58 of praisonai and 1.6.58 of praisonaiagents.

A vulnerability was detected in imranrisal-dev Student-Management-System 18ea7904c339e0c7b0234724a79c939ce6191def/a8d43a29aaf267e7ca97171d6dbb44057bcd7f8c. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file loginCheckTest.php of the component Login. The manipulation of the argument username/password results in sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

A path traversal vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed an unauthenticated attacker to delete arbitrary files and directories on the instance, including the entire user storage directory containing Git LFS objects, release assets, attachments, and avatars. The X-GitHub-Request-Id request header was used without sanitization as a filesystem path segment for the upload buffer directory, so a traversal value pointed the buffer at an arbitrary path and the deferred cleanup routine recursively removed the traversed target. Exploitation required only network reachability to the instance and no authentication, and it worked even when private mode was enabled. This vulnerability affected all versions of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to 3.22 and was fixed in versions 3.21.4, 3.20.6, 3.19.10, 3.18.13 and 3.17.19. This vulnerability was reported via the GitHub Bug Bounty program.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a cryptographic weakness in the custom component validation mechanism. When the optional hardening mode that restricts execution to trusted component templates is enabled, the application validates component code using a truncated SHA‑256 hash. Because the hash comparison relies on only a portion of the digest, an attacker can craft malicious component code that collides with a trusted template hash and bypasses validation. Successful exploitation allows the attacker to introduce and execute unauthorized Python code within the Langflow process, defeating the intended security control and potentially leading to full compromise of the affected instance.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to execute unintended code during Agentic Assistant validation due to improper handling of LLM‑generated components. The application executes model‑generated Python code in the backend during validation prior to user approval, which may allow an attacker to trigger side effects such as outbound network access, file system interaction, or data exfiltration with the privileges of the Langflow backend process.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow a remote attacker to inject arbitrary code on the system, due to the improper control of user input code.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, 1.0.0 through 1.10.3, and 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 could allow a remote attacker to traverse directories on the system. An attacker could send a specially crafted URL request containing "dot dot " sequences ( /.. /) to v i ew arbitrary files on the system.

IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.3 is vulnerable to Path Traversal in the Knowledge Bases API (`POST /api/v1/knowledge_bases`). This occurs because user-supplied knowledge base names are used directly to create file paths without proper sanitization or containment checks. An authenticated attacker can exploit this flaw to create directories and write files anywhere on the server's filesystem.

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. In versions prior to 4.6.40, the bundled Claude GitHub Actions workflow is vulnerable to command injection because it embeds an attacker-controlled pull request branch name into a Bash run: block without quoting or validation. Additionally, the workflow allows any @claude comment to trigger the job regardless of whether the commenter is a trusted collaborator. An outside contributor can open a pull request from a fork whose branch name contains shell metacharacters and comment @claude, causing Bash to execute arbitrary shell code in the GitHub Actions runner. Because these commands run in a job holding a GitHub App token with write permissions, OIDC access, and gh/git access, the injection can be chained through $GITHUB_PATH to compromise later privileged steps, enabling repository writes, pull request and issue manipulation, or OIDC-token abuse. This issue has been fixed in version 4.6.40.

Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. Prior to 39.8.9, 40.9.2, 41.2.1, and 42.0.0-beta.3, the DevTools reveal in file manager action could launch the target file rather than reveal it. An attacker with a separate means of running script inside the DevTools frontend, such as a malicious DevTools extension, could use showItemInFolder handling to execute native code outside the sandbox when DevTools is opened for windows exposed to untrusted content or untrusted DevTools extensions. This issue is fixed in 39.8.9, 40.9.2, 41.2.1, and 42.0.0-beta.3.

Jenkins Horreum Plugin 0.16.162.v33b_4a_a_b_5f828 and earlier does not set the appropriate context for credentials lookup, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to have Jenkins send credentials they are not entitled to use to the administrator-configured Horreum URL.

Jenkins Google Chat Notification Plugin 166.ve6b_de280f2e8 and earlier does not set the appropriate context for credentials lookup, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to access and capture credentials they are not entitled to use.

Jenkins Summary Display Plugin 1.15 and earlier does not escape the job name in a JavaScript context in build report pages, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers with Item/Create or Item/Configure permission.

Jenkins Qualys Container Scanning Connector Plugin 1.8.0.5 and earlier does not escape user-controlled field values in a JavaScript context, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers with Item/Configure permission.

Jenkins Multijob Plugin 669.v9d96a_d9c71b_0 and earlier provides Groovy scripting features that do not integrate with Script Security Plugin, allowing attackers with Item/Create or Item/Configure permission to execute arbitrary code in the context of the Jenkins controller JVM.

Jenkins 2.575 and earlier, LTS 2.568.1 and earlier improperly identifies file paths attempting path traversal in file parameter names, allowing attackers with Item/Configure and Item/Build permission to write files to arbitrary locations on the controller file system.

Jenkins 2.575 and earlier, LTS 2.568.1 and earlier does not safely handle symbolic links with effectively empty names during the extraction of `.tar` and `.tar.gz` archives, allowing attackers able to control agent processes to provide crafted archives to the controller to write files to arbitrary locations on the file system, restricted only by file system access permissions of the user running Jenkins.

A flaw was found in the RPM Package Manager (RPM). A local user could be affected by a heap buffer overflow vulnerability when processing a specially crafted NDB database file. This issue arises from an error in how RPM handles certain calculations during file parsing, leading to an incorrect memory allocation. An attacker could leverage this to cause a denial of service, making the system unavailable.