Search
Search Results (333092 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-25160 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 9.1 Critical |
| Alist is a file list program that supports multiple storages, powered by Gin and Solidjs. Prior to version 3.57.0, the application disables TLS certificate verification by default for all outgoing storage driver communications, making the system vulnerable to Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks. This enables the complete decryption, theft, and manipulation of all data transmitted during storage operations, severely compromising the confidentiality and integrity of user data. This issue has been patched in version 3.57.0. | ||||
| CVE-2024-47067 | 2 Alist Project, Alistgo | 2 Alist, Alist | 2026-02-13 | 6.1 Medium |
| AList is a file list program that supports multiple storages. AList contains a reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability in helper.go. The endpoint /i/:link_name takes in a user-provided value and reflects it back in the response. The endpoint returns an application/xml response, opening it up to HTML tags via XHTML and thus leading to a XSS vulnerability. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.29.0. | ||||
| CVE-2022-26533 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 6.1 Medium |
| Alist v2.1.0 and below was discovered to contain a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via /i/:data/ipa.plist. | ||||
| CVE-2022-45969 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 9.8 Critical |
| Alist v3.4.0 is vulnerable to Directory Traversal, | ||||
| CVE-2022-45968 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 8.8 High |
| Alist v3.4.0 is vulnerable to File Upload. A user with only file upload permission can upload any file to any folder (even a password protected one). | ||||
| CVE-2022-45970 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 5.4 Medium |
| Alist v3.5.1 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS) via the bulletin board. | ||||
| CVE-2023-31726 | 1 Alistgo | 1 Alist | 2026-02-13 | 7.5 High |
| AList 3.15.1 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control, which can be exploited by attackers to obtain sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2025-68128 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-68127 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-68126 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-68125 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-68124 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-58184 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-58182 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2025-47915 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2024-34157 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2024-34154 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2023-45291 | 2026-02-13 | N/A | ||
| reserved but not needed | ||||
| CVE-2023-27533 | 5 Fedoraproject, Haxx, Netapp and 2 more | 15 Fedora, Curl, Active Iq Unified Manager and 12 more | 2026-02-13 | 9.8 Critical |
| A vulnerability in input validation exists in curl <8.0 during communication using the TELNET protocol may allow an attacker to pass on maliciously crafted user name and "telnet options" during server negotiation. The lack of proper input scrubbing allows an attacker to send content or perform option negotiation without the application's intent. This vulnerability could be exploited if an application allows user input, thereby enabling attackers to execute arbitrary code on the system. | ||||
| CVE-2023-23915 | 4 Haxx, Netapp, Redhat and 1 more | 13 Curl, Active Iq Unified Manager, Clustered Data Ontap and 10 more | 2026-02-13 | 6.5 Medium |
| A cleartext transmission of sensitive information vulnerability exists in curl <v7.88.0 that could cause HSTS functionality to behave incorrectly when multiple URLs are requested in parallel. Using its HSTS support, curl can be instructed to use HTTPS instead of using an insecure clear-text HTTP step even when HTTP is provided in the URL. This HSTS mechanism would however surprisingly fail when multiple transfers are done in parallel as the HSTS cache file gets overwritten by the most recentlycompleted transfer. A later HTTP-only transfer to the earlier host name would then *not* get upgraded properly to HSTS. | ||||