| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Protection mechanism failure for some LLM-on-Ray before version 1.0 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) oneCCL Bindings for PyTorch before version v2.8.0 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) AI Reference Models before version v3.4.1 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) LLM Library for PyTorch within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) Neural Compressor software before version v3.6 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) AI Containers before version v0.4.0 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Cluster Management Toolkit for Kubernetes software before version v0.8.5 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some LLM Scaler software within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel Extension for TensorFlow software before version 2.15.0.3 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) Data Center Attestation Primitives (Intel(R) DCAP) may allow information disclosure. Unprivileged software adversary with an unauthenticated user combined with a low complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via network access when attack requirements are present with special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (none), integrity (high) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Craft CMS versions >= 5.0.0-RC1 before 5.10.7 and >= 4.0.0-RC1 before 4.18.3 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the Twig sandbox mechanism. Because Craft marks the ElementInterface as safe (via the AllowedInSandbox attribute) and the sandbox allowlisting extends to the entire class hierarchy (craft\base\Component up to yii\base\Component), an authenticated attacker with permission to access the control panel can render a malicious Twig template that abuses the yii\base\Component arbitrary function-call gadget to execute arbitrary code, even when the Twig sandbox is enabled via enableTwigSandbox(). |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/amdgpu/gfx12: replace BUG_ON() with WARN_ON()
There's no need to crash the kernel for these cases.
(cherry picked from commit f952076f76d62f783e8ba4995a7c400d39354ccf) |
| Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| The Security Optimizer WordPress plugin from 1.5.8 to 1.6.4 does not correctly validate requests to its optional IP-based login restriction feature, allowing the restriction to be bypassed so that unauthenticated requests from non-allowlisted IP addresses can reach and use the login form, defeating the access control the administrator configured. |
| Insufficient policy enforcement in Navigation in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.109 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) |
| A missing permission check in Jenkins Violation Comments to GitLab Plugin 2.62.0 and earlier allows attackers with Overall/Read permission to enumerate credentials IDs of credentials stored in Jenkins. |
| The account locking mechanism fails to trigger when secondary user stores are inaccessible. The software does not maintain a consistent state for account locking if it cannot reach all configured user stores, allowing an attacker to repeatedly attempt authentication with invalid credentials without triggering the lockout mechanism for users within active stores.
When the account locking mechanism is bypassed due to the inaccessibility of secondary user stores, users in accessible user stores are left vulnerable to brute force attacks. A malicious actor can exploit this by attempting numerous invalid password combinations against a user account without the expected account lockout consequence. |
| Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.109 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) |
| Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.109 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) |
| The Conditional Authentication (Adaptive Authentication) script does not correctly enforce the completion of all required authentication steps when a specific multi-step pattern involving certain authenticators is configured. This allows an attacker to bypass intermediate authentication challenges by exploiting how the script handles callbacks and re-execution of authentication steps.
Successful exploitation allows a malicious actor to gain unauthorized access to a targeted user account. This vulnerability can only be exploited when all of the following conditions are met: the application login flow contains a specific secondary authenticator, the Conditional Authentication script is configured with particular event callbacks and re-executes an authentication step, the targeted user has one of the impacted authenticators enrolled, and the attacker successfully completes any preceding authentication steps. |
