Total
385578 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-82733 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash Typescript | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information vulnerability in ash-project ash_typescript allows an unauthenticated attacker to read internal application data from an HTTP 500 response body. When a typed-controller route handler returns anything other than a %Plug.Conn{}, dispatch/3 in lib/ash_typescript/typed_controller/request_handler.ex passes the value to unexpected_return/2, which interpolates inspect(value, limit: 50) directly into the response message. The limit option bounds elements per collection rather than the term as a whole, so a handler falling through with a term such as {:error, %User{}} or a changeset serialises its full field set, including hashed passwords, tokens, and tenant identifiers, into the JSON error returned to the caller. This contradicts the module's own posture elsewhere: the rescue clause gates Exception.message/1 behind AshTypescript.typed_controller_show_raised_errors?/0 and otherwise returns a generic message, while this path is ungated and always echoes. This issue affects ash_typescript: from 0.15.0 before 0.18.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82734 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input vulnerability in ash-project ash allows an attacker to submit a non-finite decimal value that bypasses numeric bounds constraints or fails later operations on the value. Ash.Type.Decimal cast input through Ecto's decimal cast in cast_input/2 and cast_stored/2 (lib/ash/type/decimal.ex) without checking that the resulting value is finite. Elixir's Decimal represents Infinity and NaN as valid structs, so a value such as "Infinity" or "NaN" passed casting and was persisted. Because NaN compares as false against every bound, min and max constraints do not reject it, and the stored special value later raises when used in Decimal arithmetic or is refused by the data layer, failing subsequent requests. The fix rejects any non-finite Decimal during casting. This issue affects ash: from 1.28.0 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82741 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input vulnerability in ash-project ash lets an attacker confuse the stored type tag of an Ash.Type.Union value that uses storage: :map_with_tag, bypassing that member's validation and any tag-based authorization. For a union with storage: :map_with_tag, each member is identified in storage by a configured tag and tag_value. Ash.Type.Union.dump_to_native/2 (lib/ash/type/union.ex) did not force the configured tag when writing the value, so a tag carried in the submitted value was persisted verbatim. An attacker can therefore store a value whose data belongs to one member but whose tag names a different member. On read the value is re-selected by its tag and treated as the incompatible member (a type confusion), bypassing the real member's constraints and any logic or policy that branches on the union tag. The fix drops any incoming tag and forces the configured tag value on dump. This issue affects ash: from 2.14.18 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82744 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Not Failing Securely (Failing Open) vulnerability in ash-project ash skips an Ash.Reactor change when the guard controlling it raises, so a change meant to run does not. An Ash.Reactor change step can be gated by where validations that decide whether the change runs. Ash.Reactor.ChangeStep (lib/ash/reactor/steps/change_step.ex) evaluated those guards in apply_where_clauses/3, and apply_validation rescued any exception into {:error, error}. The reduce treated that identically to a guard whose condition was simply not met and bypassed the change. So when a guard raises (for example on attacker-influenced input), a change that enforces a security-relevant modification is skipped rather than failing the step. The fix distinguishes a raised exception (now {:raised, error}) and halts the step with an error, failing closed. This issue affects ash: from 3.0.0-rc.17 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82745 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Improper Access Control vulnerability in ash-project ash lets a create action overwrite an existing record when the ETS or Mnesia data layer is used, because neither enforced primary-key uniqueness on insert. Unlike a SQL data layer, whose unique primary-key constraint rejects a duplicate, the ETS and Mnesia data layers implemented create as a keyed insert that replaces any existing entry with the same primary key (lib/ash/data_layer/ets/ets.ex, lib/ash/data_layer/mnesia/mnesia.ex). An actor who can set the primary key on a create (for example a user-supplied string or integer key) can submit a create whose key matches an existing record and silently overwrite it, destroying and replacing another entity's data without going through the update action or its policies. The fix rejects a create whose primary key already exists with an already-taken error, and only allows duplicates for keyless resources. This issue affects ash: from 0.4.0 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82746 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Missing Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash allows an actor to update records forbidden by resource policies through the atomic path of Ash.update_many/4. Ash.update_many/4 runs as a single atomic statement (a data-layer update_many, for example a SQL MERGE) whenever an atomic strategy is used and the data layer supports it. Ash.Actions.Update.UpdateMany (lib/ash/actions/update/update_many.ex) took that path even under authorize?: true without applying the resource's policies, so the statement updated every row matched by primary key regardless of the policy filter that authorization would impose. An actor could therefore update records the policies forbid, such as rows belonging to another actor or tenant. The fix restricts the atomic path to data layers supporting changeset filters when authorizing, authorizes each changeset, and merges the resulting policy filter into each changeset so the statement only touches authorized rows. This issue affects ash: from 3.29.0 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82748 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in ash-project ash authorizes an aggregate under one read action while computing it under another, so an aggregate can run with policies that do not match the action it was authorized against. Ash.Actions.Aggregate groups aggregates by their {authorize?, read_action} and authorizes each group under that read action, but when building the data query it selected the action as opts[:action] || read_action || <primary read> (lib/ash/actions/aggregate.ex). When a caller passed an :action option, the aggregate query ran under that action while authorization had been computed for the group's own read_action. If the run action's read policies are more permissive than the authorized one, the aggregate (a count or sum) is computed over records the authorized action's policies would have excluded, disclosing information about data the actor cannot read. The fix runs the aggregate under the same read_action it is authorized against. This issue affects ash: from 3.5.13 before 3.32.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-70399 | 1 Erlang | 3 Erlang/otp, Erlang\/otp, Otp | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling vulnerability in Erlang/OTP inets httpd allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause denial of service by opening and holding open a large number of connections. The max_clients option is documented to default to 150, and the inets hardening guide presents that limit as the first layer of denial-of-service defence, but a server that does not set it explicitly accepts an unlimited number of simultaneous connections. Establishing the connections is sufficient; no valid request and no authentication are required. The accept gate in httpd_manager:handle_new_connection/4 reads the option with httpd_util:lookup/2, which returns undefined when the key is absent, rather than the three-argument form carrying the 150 default that the neighbouring get_ustate/2 uses. Erlang term ordering places every integer before every atom, so the Count =< Max guard holds for any connection count and the server never returns {reject, busy}. Each accepted connection occupies a worker process and a socket for as long as it is held, driving the node towards process, memory and file descriptor exhaustion. Servers that set max_clients explicitly are unaffected, because a configured value is applied as intended. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 27.3.4.17, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.6, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.6, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.3.2.7, from 9.4 before 9.6.2.3, and from 9.7 before 9.7.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-71380 | 1 Erlang | 3 Erlang/otp, Erlang\/otp, Otp | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime vulnerability in Erlang/OTP inets httpd allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause denial of service by sending valid request headers with a large Content-Length and then stalling before the body is complete. httpd_request_handler:handle_info/2 cancels the request timeout as soon as a parse step succeeds, which includes the headers, and the clause that handles a decoder asking for more data re-arms the socket with {active, once} without setting any further timer. httpd_request:whole_body/2 returns such a continuation whenever the bytes received are fewer than the announced Content-Length, so a well-formed request that stops mid-body leaves the worker waiting indefinitely. The periodic byte-rate check that would reclaim it is armed only when minimum_bytes_per_second is configured, which it is not by default. Repeating this across connections occupies every worker permitted by max_clients and denies service to legitimate clients at negligible bandwidth cost. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 27.3.4.17, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.6, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.6, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.3.2.7, from 9.4 before 9.6.2.3, and from 9.7 before 9.7.2. Whether OTP before OTP 17.0, corresponding to inets before 5.10, is affected is unknown. | ||||
| CVE-2026-73276 | 1 Erlang | 2 Erlang/otp, Erlang\/otp | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Gracefulness code ignored cases that should be rejected, resulting in possible HTTP Request Smuggling opportunities. This issue affects OTP from OTP 22.2 before OTP 27.3.4.17, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.6, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.6, corresponding to inets from 7.1.2 before 9.3.2.7, from 9.4 before 9.6.2.3, and from 9.7 before 9.7.2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-55951 | 1 Erlang | 3 Erlang/otp, Erlang\/otp, Otp | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| The Erlang/OTP httpc HTTP client does not enforce a limit on the total size of response headers received from a server. The max_header_size option defaults to nolimit, and httpc_response:parse_headers/6 accumulates every header into a list before the length check runs (which only fires after the terminating CRLF CRLF is received). A malicious or compromised HTTP server can send an arbitrarily large number of headers, or headers with very large values, causing the client process to allocate unbounded memory until the system runs out of memory or the BEAM VM crashes. A proof-of-concept server sending 100,000 headers of roughly 4000 bytes each caused the client VM to allocate over 13 GB of memory in under 30 seconds. Any application using httpc:request/4,5 to connect to untrusted servers is affected. No authentication is required: any server the client connects to (including via a redirect or man-in-the-middle) can trigger the exhaustion. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 27.3.4.17, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.6, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.6, corresponding to inets from 5.10 before 9.3.2.7, from 9.4 before 9.6.2.3, and from 9.7 before 9.7.2. Whether OTP before OTP 17.0, corresponding to inets before 5.10, is affected is unknown. | ||||
| CVE-2026-82725 | 1 Ash-project | 1 Ash Phoenix | 2026-09-01 | N/A |
| Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in ash-project ash_phoenix lets an attacker who controls filter form parameters filter across relationships the resource author marked non-public, turning the returned rows into a boolean oracle over private related data. AshPhoenix.FilterForm resolved every relationship hop in the user-supplied path with Ash.Resource.Info.related/2, which traverses private relationships, and only checked the terminal field for publicity. parse_path_and_field/2 also rewrote a field naming a relationship into an extra path segment, so field=some_private_rel was accepted too. Both path and field come straight from form params, and the resulting ref went to Ash.Query.do_filter/2 without the public-only enforcement of Ash.Filter.parse_input/2. The fix resolves each hop with Ash.Resource.Info.public_relationship/2, rejecting the first non-public hop, and requires the terminal field to be public. This issue affects ash_phoenix: from 0.6.0-rc.1 before 2.3.25. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58575 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains an Authentication Bypass by Spoofing vulnerability. An authenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability to escalate privileges to Administrator. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58569 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains an Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code with root privileges.. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58571 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains an OS Command Injection vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79683 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains a Protection Mechanism Failure vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to write attacker-controlled content to arbitrary filesystem paths. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79684 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains a Protection Mechanism Failure vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to bypass access restrictions and gain escalated privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79686 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains a Protection Mechanism Failure vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to bypass access restrictions and gain escalated privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-58572 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 8.8 High |
| Dell PowerStore contains a Code Injection vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code with root privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2026-79685 | 1 Dell | 12 Powerstore 1000t, Powerstore 1200t, Powerstore 3000t and 9 more | 2026-09-01 | 6.5 Medium |
| Dell PowerStore contains an Argument Injection vulnerability. An authenticated user with limited privileges could potentially exploit this vulnerability to gain unauthorized access to sensitive sensitive system information. | ||||