Total
878 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-54549 | 1 Arista | 1 Danz Monitoring Fabric | 2026-04-15 | 5.9 Medium |
| Cryptographic validation of upgrade images could be circumventing by dropping a specifically crafted file into the upgrade ISO | ||||
| CVE-2025-32060 | 1 Bosch | 1 Infotainment System Ecu | 2026-04-15 | 6.7 Medium |
| The system suffers from the absence of a kernel module signature verification. If an attacker can execute commands on behalf of root user (due to additional vulnerabilities), then he/she is also able to load custom kernel modules to the kernel space and execute code in the kernel context. Such a flaw can lead to taking control over the entire system. First identified on Nissan Leaf ZE1 manufactured in 2020. | ||||
| CVE-2024-1721 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature vulnerability in HYPR Passwordless on Windows allows Malicious Software Update.This issue affects HYPR Passwordless: before 9.1. | ||||
| CVE-2025-47934 | 1 Openpgpjs | 1 Openpgpjs | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| OpenPGP.js is a JavaScript implementation of the OpenPGP protocol. Startinf in version 5.0.1 and prior to versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1, a maliciously modified message can be passed to either `openpgp.verify` or `openpgp.decrypt`, causing these functions to return a valid signature verification result while returning data that was not actually signed. This flaw allows signature verifications of inline (non-detached) signed messages (using `openpgp.verify`) and signed-and-encrypted messages (using `openpgp.decrypt` with `verificationKeys`) to be spoofed, since both functions return extracted data that may not match the data that was originally signed. Detached signature verifications are not affected, as no signed data is returned in that case. In order to spoof a message, the attacker needs a single valid message signature (inline or detached) as well as the plaintext data that was legitimately signed, and can then construct an inline-signed message or signed-and-encrypted message with any data of the attacker's choice, which will appear as legitimately signed by affected versions of OpenPGP.js. In other words, any inline-signed message can be modified to return any other data (while still indicating that the signature was valid), and the same is true for signed+encrypted messages if the attacker can obtain a valid signature and encrypt a new message (of the attacker's choice) together with that signature. The issue has been patched in versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1. Some workarounds are available. When verifying inline-signed messages, extract the message and signature(s) from the message returned by `openpgp.readMessage`, and verify the(/each) signature as a detached signature by passing the signature and a new message containing only the data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. When decrypting and verifying signed+encrypted messages, decrypt and verify the message in two steps, by first calling `openpgp.decrypt` without `verificationKeys`, and then passing the returned signature(s) and a new message containing the decrypted data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. | ||||
| CVE-2024-5912 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| An improper file signature check in Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR agent may allow an attacker to bypass the Cortex XDR agent's executable blocking capabilities and run untrusted executables on the device. This issue can be leveraged to execute untrusted software without being detected or blocked. | ||||
| CVE-2024-38807 | 2026-04-15 | 6.3 Medium | ||
| Applications that use spring-boot-loader or spring-boot-loader-classic and contain custom code that performs signature verification of nested jar files may be vulnerable to signature forgery where content that appears to have been signed by one signer has, in fact, been signed by another. | ||||
| CVE-2025-31335 | 2026-04-15 | 4 Medium | ||
| The OpenSAML C++ library before 3.3.1 allows forging of signed SAML messages via parameter manipulation (when using SAML bindings that rely on non-XML signatures). | ||||
| CVE-2020-36843 | 2026-04-15 | 4.3 Medium | ||
| The implementation of EdDSA in EdDSA-Java (aka ed25519-java) through 0.3.0 exhibits signature malleability and does not satisfy the SUF-CMA (Strong Existential Unforgeability under Chosen Message Attacks) property. This allows attackers to create new valid signatures different from previous signatures for a known message. | ||||
| CVE-2024-11957 | 1 Kingsoft | 1 Wps Office | 2026-04-15 | N/A |
| Improper verification of the digital signature in ksojscore.dll in Kingsoft WPS Office in versions equal or less than 12.1.0.18276 on Windows allows an attacker to load an arbitrary Windows library. The patch released in version 12.2.0.16909 to mitigate CVE-2024-7262 was not restrictive enough. | ||||
| CVE-2025-68113 | 1 Altcha | 1 Altcha | 2026-04-15 | 6.5 Medium |
| ALTCHA is privacy-first software for captcha and bot protection. A cryptographic semantic binding flaw in ALTCHA libraries allows challenge payload splicing, which may enable replay attacks. The HMAC signature does not unambiguously bind challenge parameters to the nonce, allowing an attacker to reinterpret a valid proof-of-work submission with a modified expiration value. This may allow previously solved challenges to be reused beyond their intended lifetime, depending on server-side replay handling and deployment assumptions. The vulnerability primarily impacts abuse-prevention mechanisms such as rate limiting and bot mitigation. It does not directly affect data confidentiality or integrity. This issue has been addressed by enforcing explicit semantic separation between challenge parameters and the nonce during HMAC computation. Users are advised to upgrade to patched versions, which include version 1.0.0 of the altcha Golang package, version 1.0.0 of the altcha Rubygem, version 1.0.0 of the altcha pip package, version 1.0.0 of the altcha Erlang package, version 1.4.1 of the altcha-lib npm package, version 1.3.1 of the altcha-org/altcha Composer package, and version 1.3.0 of the org.altcha:altcha Maven package. As a mitigation, implementations may append a delimiter to the end of the `salt` value prior to HMAC computation (for example, `<salt>?expires=<time>&`). This prevents ambiguity between parameters and the nonce and is backward-compatible with existing implementations, as the delimiter is treated as a standard URL parameter separator. | ||||
| CVE-2024-50347 | 2026-04-15 | N/A | ||
| Laravel Reverb provides a real-time WebSocket communication backend for Laravel applications. Prior to 1.4.0, there is an issue where verification signatures for requests sent to Reverb's Pusher-compatible API were not being verified. This API is used in scenarios such as broadcasting a message from a backend service or for obtaining statistical information (such as number of connections) about a given channel. This issue only affects the Pusher-compatible API endpoints and not the WebSocket connections themselves. In order to exploit this vulnerability, the application ID which, should never be exposed, would need to be known by an attacker. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.4.0. | ||||
| CVE-2025-31489 | 1 Minio | 1 Minio | 2026-04-15 | 7.5 High |
| MinIO is a High Performance Object Storage released under GNU Affero General Public License v3.0. The signature component of the authorization may be invalid, which would mean that as a client you can use any arbitrary secret to upload objects given the user already has prior WRITE permissions on the bucket. Prior knowledge of access-key, and bucket name this user might have access to - and an access-key with a WRITE permissions is necessary. However with relevant information in place, uploading random objects to buckets is trivial and easy via curl. This issue is fixed in RELEASE.2025-04-03T14-56-28Z. | ||||
| CVE-2026-33895 | 1 Digitalbazaar | 1 Forge | 2026-04-14 | 7.5 High |
| Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to version 1.4.0, Ed25519 signature verification accepts forged non-canonical signatures where the scalar S is not reduced modulo the group order (`S >= L`). A valid signature and its `S + L` variant both verify in forge, while Node.js `crypto.verify` (OpenSSL-backed) rejects the `S + L` variant, as defined by the specification. This class of signature malleability has been exploited in practice to bypass authentication and authorization logic (see CVE-2026-25793, CVE-2022-35961). Applications relying on signature uniqueness (i.e., dedup by signature bytes, replay tracking, signed-object canonicalization checks) may be bypassed. Version 1.4.0 patches the issue. | ||||
| CVE-2026-32883 | 2 Botan Project, Randombit | 2 Botan, Botan | 2026-04-14 | 5.9 Medium |
| Botan is a C++ cryptography library. From version 3.0.0 to before version 3.11.0, during X509 path validation, OCSP responses were checked for an appropriate status code, but critically omitted verifying the signature of the OCSP response itself. This issue has been patched in version 3.11.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-34840 | 2 Hackerbay, Oneuptime | 2 Oneuptime, Oneuptime | 2026-04-14 | 8.1 High |
| OneUptime is an open-source monitoring and observability platform. Prior to version 10.0.42, OneUptime's SAML SSO implementation (App/FeatureSet/Identity/Utils/SSO.ts) has decoupled signature verification and identity extraction. isSignatureValid() verifies the first <Signature> element in the XML DOM using xml-crypto, while getEmail() always reads from assertion[0] via xml2js. An attacker can prepend an unsigned assertion containing an arbitrary identity before a legitimately signed assertion, resulting in authentication bypass. This issue has been patched in version 10.0.42. | ||||
| CVE-2026-0234 | 2 Palo Alto Networks, Paloaltonetworks | 4 Cortex Xsiam Microsoft Teams Marketplace, Cortex Xsoar Microsoft Teams Marketplace, Cortex Xsiam and 1 more | 2026-04-14 | 9.1 Critical |
| An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability exists in Cortex XSOAR and Cortex XSIAM platforms during integration of Microsoft Teams that enables an unauthenticated user to access and modify protected resources. | ||||
| CVE-2026-32294 | 1 Jetkvm | 2 Jetkvm, Kvm | 2026-04-10 | 4.7 Medium |
| JetKVM prior to 0.5.4 does not verify the authenticity of downloaded firmware files. An attacker-in-the-middle or a compromised update server could modify the firmware and the corresponding SHA256 hash to pass verification. | ||||
| CVE-2026-21002 | 1 Samsung | 1 Galaxy Store | 2026-04-09 | 5.5 Medium |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Galaxy Store prior to version 4.6.03.8 allows local attacker to install arbitrary application. | ||||
| CVE-2017-13083 | 1 Akeo | 1 Rufus | 2026-04-07 | N/A |
| Akeo Consulting Rufus prior to version 2.17.1187 does not adequately validate the integrity of updates downloaded over HTTP, allowing an attacker to easily convince a user to execute arbitrary code | ||||
| CVE-2026-34377 | 2 Zcashfoundation, Zfnd | 4 Zebra, Zebra-consensus, Zebra and 1 more | 2026-04-07 | 8.1 High |
| ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.0 and zebra-consensus version 5.0.1, a logic error in Zebra's transaction verification cache could allow a malicious miner to induce a consensus split. By matching a valid transaction's txid while providing invalid authorization data, a miner could cause vulnerable Zebra nodes to accept an invalid block, leading to a consensus split from the rest of the Zcash network. This would not allow invalid transactions to be accepted but could result in a consensus split between vulnerable Zebra nodes and invulnerable Zebra and Zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.0 and zebra-consensus version 5.0.1. | ||||