#docker

## Vulnerability Overview ### Description RustFS implements gRPC authentication using a hardcoded static token `"rustfs rpc"` that is: 1. **Publicly exposed** in the source code repository 2. **Hardcoded** on both client and server sides 3. **Non-configurable** with no mechanism for token rotation 4. **Universally valid** across all RustFS deployments Any attacker with network access to the gRPC port can authenticate using this publicly known token and execute privileged operations including data destruction, policy manipulation, and cluster configuration changes. --- ## Vulnerable Code Analysis ### Server-Side Authentication (rustfs/src/server/http.rs:679-686) ```rust #[allow(clippy::result_large_err)] fn check_auth(req: Request<()>) -> std::result::Result<Request<()>, Status> { let token: MetadataValue<_> = "rustfs rpc".parse().unwrap(); // ⚠️ HARDCODED! match req.metadata().get("authorization") { Some(t) if token == t => Ok(req), _ => Err(Status::una...

Last week’s cyber news in 2025 was not about one big incident. It was about many small cracks opening at the same time. Tools people trust every day behave in unexpected ways. Old flaws resurfaced. New ones were used almost immediately. A common theme ran through it all in 2025. Attackers moved faster than fixes. Access meant for work, updates, or support kept getting abused. And damage did not

It’s getting harder to tell where normal tech ends and malicious intent begins. Attackers are no longer just breaking in — they’re blending in, hijacking everyday tools, trusted apps, and even AI assistants. What used to feel like clear-cut “hacker stories” now looks more like a mirror of the systems we all use. This week’s findings show a pattern: precision, patience, and persuasion. The

## Summary The download service (`download_service.py`) makes HTTP requests using raw `requests.get()` without utilizing the application's SSRF protection (`safe_requests.py`). This can allow attackers to access internal services and attempt to reach cloud provider metadata endpoints (AWS/GCP/Azure), as well as perform internal network reconnaissance, by submitting malicious URLs through the API, depending on the deployment and surrounding controls. **CWE**: CWE-918 (Server-Side Request Forgery) --- ## Details ### Vulnerable Code Location **File**: `src/local_deep_research/research_library/services/download_service.py` The application has proper SSRF protection implemented in `security/safe_requests.py` and `security/ssrf_validator.py`, which blocks: - Loopback addresses (127.0.0.0/8) - Private IP ranges (10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16) - AWS metadata endpoint (169.254.169.254) - Link-local addresses However, `download_service.py` bypasses this protection by using ra...

Cybersecurity researchers have discovered two malicious Google Chrome extensions with the same name and published by the same developer that come with capabilities to intercept traffic and capture user credentials. The extensions are advertised as a "multi-location network speed test plug-in" for developers and foreign trade personnel. Both the browser add-ons are available for download as of

Hi Fedify team! 👋 Thank you for your work on Fedify—it's a fantastic library for building federated applications. While reviewing the codebase, I discovered a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerability that I'd like to report. I hope this helps improve the project's security. --- ## Summary A Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerability exists in Fedify's document loader. The HTML parsing regex at `packages/fedify/src/runtime/docloader.ts:259` contains nested quantifiers that cause catastrophic backtracking when processing maliciously crafted HTML responses. **An attacker-controlled federated server can respond with a small (~170 bytes) malicious HTML payload that blocks the victim's Node.js event loop for 14+ seconds, causing a Denial of Service.** | Field | Value | |-------|-------| | **CWE** | CWE-1333 (Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity) | --- ## Details ### Vulnerable Code The vulnerability is located in `packages/fedify/src/runtime...

Learn how DevOps and DevSecOps strengthen cybersecurity through automation, CI/CD, and secure DevOps development services.

**Vulnerability Overview** Langflow provides an API Request component that can issue arbitrary HTTP requests within a flow. This component takes a user-supplied URL, performs only normalization and basic format checks, and then sends the request using a server-side httpx client. It does not block private IP ranges (127.0.0.1, the 10/172/192 ranges) or cloud metadata endpoints (169.254.169.254), and it returns the response body as the result. Because the flow execution endpoints (/api/v1/run, /api/v1/run/advanced) can be invoked with just an API key, if an attacker can control the API Request URL in a flow, non-blind SSRF is possible—accessing internal resources from the server’s network context. This enables requests to, and collection of responses from, internal administrative endpoints, metadata services, and internal databases/services, leading to information disclosure and providing a foothold for further attacks. **Vulnerable Code** 1. When a flow runs, the API Request URL i...

Pillar Security has identified a critical indirect prompt injection vulnerability in Docker’s ‘Ask Gordon’ assistant. By poisoning metadata on Docker Hub, attackers could bypass security to exfiltrate private build logs and chat history. Discover how the "lethal trifecta" enabled this attack and why updating to Docker Desktop 4.50.0 is essential for developer security.

## Summary The `fsSize()` function in `systeminformation` is vulnerable to **OS Command Injection (CWE-78)** on Windows systems. The optional `drive` parameter is directly concatenated into a PowerShell command without sanitization, allowing arbitrary command execution when user-controlled input reaches this function. **Affected Platforms:** Windows only **CVSS Breakdown:** - **Attack Vector (AV:N):** Network - if used in a web application/API - **Attack Complexity (AC:H):** High - requires application to pass user input to `fsSize()` - **Privileges Required (PR:N):** None - no authentication required at library level - **User Interaction (UI:N):** None - **Scope (S:U):** Unchanged - executes within Node.js process context - **Confidentiality/Integrity/Availability (C:H/I:H/A:H):** High impact if exploited > **Note:** The actual exploitability depends on how applications use this function. If an application does not pass user-controlled input to `fsSize()`, it is not vulnerable. ...