#vulnerability

A vulnerability was determined in geyang ml-logger 0.10.36 and prior. Affected is the function log_handler of the file ml_logger/server.py of the component Ping Handler. This manipulation of the argument data causes deserialization. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available.

Rob -- W / cors-anywhere instances configured as an open proxy allow unauthenticated external users to induce the server to make HTTP requests to arbitrary targets (SSRF). Because the proxy forwards requests and headers, an attacker can reach internal-only endpoints and link-local metadata services, retrieve instance role credentials or other sensitive metadata, and interact with internal APIs and services that are not intended to be internet-facing. The vulnerability is exploitable by sending crafted requests to the proxy with the target resource encoded in the URL; many cors-anywhere deployments forward arbitrary methods and headers (including PUT), which can permit exploitation of IMDSv2 workflows as well as access to internal management APIs. Successful exploitation can result in theft of cloud credentials, unauthorized access to internal services, remote code execution or privilege escalation (depending on reachable backends), data exfiltration, and full compromise of cloud resour...

apidoc-core is the core parser library to generate apidoc result following the apidoc-spec. A Prototype Pollution vulnerability in the preProcess function of apidoc-core versions thru 0.15.0 allows attackers to inject properties on Object.prototype via supplying a crafted payload, causing denial of service (DoS) as the minimum consequence.

A prototype pollution in the lib.set function of dref v0.1.2 allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via supplying a crafted payload.

Cybersecurity researchers have disclosed a critical flaw impacting Salesforce Agentforce, a platform for building artificial intelligence (AI) agents, that could allow attackers to potentially exfiltrate sensitive data from its customer relationship management (CRM) tool by means of an indirect prompt injection. The vulnerability has been codenamed ForcedLeak (CVSS score: 9.4) by Noma Security,

Cybersecurity firm Noma Security reveals ForcedLeak, a critical flaw in Salesforce Agentforce that allowed data theft. Learn what companies need to do now to secure AI agents.

The North Korea-linked threat actors associated with the Contagious Interview campaign have been attributed to a previously undocumented backdoor called AkdoorTea, along with tools like TsunamiKit and Tropidoor. Slovak cybersecurity firm ESET, which is tracking the activity under the name DeceptiveDevelopment, said the campaign targets software developers across all operating systems, Windows,

View CSAF 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CVSS v4 8.7 ATTENTION: Exploitable remotely/low attack complexity Vendor: Dingtian Equipment: DT-R002 Vulnerabilities: Insufficiently Protected Credentials 2. RISK EVALUATION Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to retrieve credentials without authentication. 3. TECHNICAL DETAILS 3.1 AFFECTED PRODUCTS The following versions of Dingtian DT-R002, a relay board, are affected: DT-R002: All versions 3.2 VULNERABILITY OVERVIEW 3.2.1 INSUFFICIENTLY PROTECTED CREDENTIALS CWE-522 All versions of Dingtian DT-R002 are vulnerable to an Insufficiently Protected Credentials vulnerability that could allow an attacker to retrieve the current user's username without authentication. CVE-2025-10879 has been assigned to this vulnerability. A CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 has been calculated; the CVSS vector string is (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N. A CVSS v4 score has also been calculated for CVE-2025-10879. A base score of 8.7 has bee...

Despite a coordinated investment of time, effort, planning, and resources, even the most up-to-date cybersecurity systems continue to fail. Every day. Why?  It’s not because security teams can't see enough. Quite the contrary. Every security tool spits out thousands of findings. Patch this. Block that. Investigate this. It's a tsunami of red dots that not even the most crackerjack team on

/* ===== Container ===== */ .td-wrap {} /* ===== Section ===== */ .td-section { } .td-title { margin: 16px 0 4px; font-size: 32px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: 800; } .td-subtitle { margin: 0 0 24px; color: #64748b; font-size: 16px; } /* ===== Timeline ===== */ .td-timeline { position: relative; margin: 0 !important;padding: 0!important; list-style: none; } /* spine */ .td-timeline:before {