Loading vulnerability details…
361,800
Total CVEs
26,223
Critical
85,816
High
1,626
CISA KEV
1,101
This Week
419 results · Page 1/17
WordPress Coding Standards is a set of PHP_CodeSniffer rules (sniffs) that enforce WordPress coding conventions. From 0.14.1 until 3.4.1, the WordPress.WP.EnqueuedResourceParameters sniff (active in the WordPress and WordPress-Extra rulesets) reconstructed the $ver argument passed to functions such as wp_enqueue_script() and ran it through eval() inside its is_falsy() method, so a maliciously crafted argument such as 'system'('id') would execute during a scan; as a result, running PHPCS with WordPressCS over untrusted PHP (for example a CI pipeline that lints pull requests, or a developer reviewing third-party code) could lead to arbitrary command execution on the scanning host. The WordPress-Core and WordPress-Docs rulesets are not affected. This issue is fixed in version 3.4.1.
The Chatbot plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Missing Authorization in versions up to, and including, 8.5.9 via the wpcs_send_email() AJAX handler. This is due to the wpcs_send_email() function being registered on both wp_ajax_wpcs_send_email and wp_ajax_nopriv_wpcs_send_email with no nonce verification, capability check, or rate limiting, while forwarding attacker-controlled recipient, subject, and body directly to wp_mail(). This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to send arbitrary emails to any recipient from the site's domain, enabling spam, phishing, and abuse that can lead to the site's IP/domain being blacklisted.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mac80211: fix MLE defragmentation If either reconf or EPCS multi-link element (MLE) is contained in a non-transmitted profile, the defragmentation routine is called with a pointer to the defragmented copy, but the original elements. This is incorrect for two reasons: - if the original defragmentation was needed, it will not find the correct data - if the original frame is at a higher address, the parsing will potentially overrun the heap data (though given the layout of the buffers, only into the new defragmentation buffer, and then it has to stop and fail once that's filled with copied data. Fix it by tracking the container along with the pointer and in doing so also unify the two almost identical defragmentation routines.