| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| MSI Center before 2.0.52.0 has Missing PE Signature Validation. |
| xml-crypto is an XML digital signature and encryption library for Node.js. An attacker may be able to exploit a vulnerability in versions prior to 6.0.1, 3.2.1, and 2.1.6 to bypass authentication or authorization mechanisms in systems that rely on xml-crypto for verifying signed XML documents. The vulnerability allows an attacker to modify a valid signed XML message in a way that still passes signature verification checks. For example, it could be used to alter critical identity or access control attributes, enabling an attacker with a valid account to escalate privileges or impersonate another user. Users of versions 6.0.0 and prior should upgrade to version 6.0.1 to receive a fix. Those who are still using v2.x or v3.x should upgrade to patched versions 2.1.6 or 3.2.1, respectively. |
| xml-crypto is an XML digital signature and encryption library for Node.js. An attacker may be able to exploit a vulnerability in versions prior to 6.0.1, 3.2.1, and 2.1.6 to bypass authentication or authorization mechanisms in systems that rely on xml-crypto for verifying signed XML documents. The vulnerability allows an attacker to modify a valid signed XML message in a way that still passes signature verification checks. For example, it could be used to alter critical identity or access control attributes, enabling an attacker to escalate privileges or impersonate another user. Users of versions 6.0.0 and prior should upgrade to version 6.0.1 to receive a fix. Those who are still using v2.x or v3.x should upgrade to patched versions 2.1.6 or 3.2.1, respectively. |
| There is a vulnerability in the Supermicro BMC firmware validation logic at Supermicro MBD-X12STW-F . An attacker can update the system firmware with a specially crafted image. |
| A SAML library not dependent on any frameworks that runs in Node. In version 5.0.1, Node-SAML loads the assertion from the (unsigned) original response document. This is different than the parts that are verified when checking signature. This allows an attacker to modify authentication details within a valid SAML assertion. For example, in one attack it is possible to remove any character from the SAML assertion username. To conduct the attack an attacker would need a validly signed document from the identity provider (IdP). This is fixed in version 5.1.0. |
| Applications that use spring-boot-loader or spring-boot-loader-classic and contain custom code that performs signature verification of nested jar files may be vulnerable to signature forgery where content that appears to have been signed by one signer has, in fact, been signed by another. |
| OpenPGP.js is a JavaScript implementation of the OpenPGP protocol. Startinf in version 5.0.1 and prior to versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1, a maliciously modified message can be passed to either `openpgp.verify` or `openpgp.decrypt`, causing these functions to return a valid signature verification result while returning data that was not actually signed. This flaw allows signature verifications of inline (non-detached) signed messages (using `openpgp.verify`) and signed-and-encrypted messages (using `openpgp.decrypt` with `verificationKeys`) to be spoofed, since both functions return extracted data that may not match the data that was originally signed. Detached signature verifications are not affected, as no signed data is returned in that case. In order to spoof a message, the attacker needs a single valid message signature (inline or detached) as well as the plaintext data that was legitimately signed, and can then construct an inline-signed message or signed-and-encrypted message with any data of the attacker's choice, which will appear as legitimately signed by affected versions of OpenPGP.js. In other words, any inline-signed message can be modified to return any other data (while still indicating that the signature was valid), and the same is true for signed+encrypted messages if the attacker can obtain a valid signature and encrypt a new message (of the attacker's choice) together with that signature. The issue has been patched in versions 5.11.3 and 6.1.1. Some workarounds are available. When verifying inline-signed messages, extract the message and signature(s) from the message returned by `openpgp.readMessage`, and verify the(/each) signature as a detached signature by passing the signature and a new message containing only the data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. When decrypting and verifying signed+encrypted messages, decrypt and verify the message in two steps, by first calling `openpgp.decrypt` without `verificationKeys`, and then passing the returned signature(s) and a new message containing the decrypted data (created using `openpgp.createMessage`) to `openpgp.verify`. |
| Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units. |
| Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to version 1.4.0, Ed25519 signature verification accepts forged non-canonical signatures where the scalar S is not reduced modulo the group order (`S >= L`). A valid signature and its `S + L` variant both verify in forge, while Node.js `crypto.verify` (OpenSSL-backed) rejects the `S + L` variant, as defined by the specification. This class of signature malleability has been exploited in practice to bypass authentication and authorization logic (see CVE-2026-25793, CVE-2022-35961). Applications relying on signature uniqueness (i.e., dedup by signature bytes, replay tracking, signed-object canonicalization checks) may be bypassed. Version 1.4.0 patches the issue. |
| Botan is a C++ cryptography library. From version 3.0.0 to before version 3.11.0, during X509 path validation, OCSP responses were checked for an appropriate status code, but critically omitted verifying the signature of the OCSP response itself. This issue has been patched in version 3.11.0. |
| OneUptime is an open-source monitoring and observability platform. Prior to version 10.0.42, OneUptime's SAML SSO implementation (App/FeatureSet/Identity/Utils/SSO.ts) has decoupled signature verification and identity extraction. isSignatureValid() verifies the first <Signature> element in the XML DOM using xml-crypto, while getEmail() always reads from assertion[0] via xml2js. An attacker can prepend an unsigned assertion containing an arbitrary identity before a legitimately signed assertion, resulting in authentication bypass. This issue has been patched in version 10.0.42. |
| An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability exists in Cortex XSOAR and Cortex XSIAM platforms during integration of Microsoft Teams that enables an unauthenticated user to access and modify protected resources. |
| JetKVM prior to 0.5.4 does not verify the authenticity of downloaded firmware files. An attacker-in-the-middle or a compromised update server could modify the firmware and the corresponding SHA256 hash to pass verification. |
| Improper verification of cryptographic signature in Galaxy Store prior to version 4.6.03.8 allows local attacker to install arbitrary application. |
| Akeo Consulting Rufus prior to version 2.17.1187 does not adequately validate the integrity of updates downloaded over HTTP, allowing an attacker to easily convince a user to execute arbitrary code |
| ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.0 and zebra-consensus version 5.0.1, a logic error in Zebra's transaction verification cache could allow a malicious miner to induce a consensus split. By matching a valid transaction's txid while providing invalid authorization data, a miner could cause vulnerable Zebra nodes to accept an invalid block, leading to a consensus split from the rest of the Zcash network. This would not allow invalid transactions to be accepted but could result in a consensus split between vulnerable Zebra nodes and invulnerable Zebra and Zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.0 and zebra-consensus version 5.0.1. |
| JOSE is a Javascript Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) library. Prior to version 0.3.5+1, a vulnerability in jose could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to forge valid JWS/JWT tokens by using a key embedded in the JOSE header (jwk). The vulnerability exists because key selection could treat header-provided jwk as a verification candidate even when that key was not present in the trusted key store. Since JOSE headers are untrusted input, an attacker could exploit this by creating a token payload, embedding an attacker-controlled public key in the header, and signing with the matching private key. Applications using affected versions for token verification are impacted. This issue has been patched in version 0.3.5+1. A workaround for this issue involves rejecting tokens where header jwk is present unless that jwk matches a key already present in the application's trusted key store. |
| An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.5.x and 3.6.x through 3.6.5 and TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0. There is a lack of contributory behavior in FFDH due to improper input validation. Using finite-field Diffie-Hellman, the other party can force the shared secret into a small set of values (lack of contributory behavior). This is a problem for protocols that depend on contributory behavior (which is not the case for TLS). The attack can be carried by the peer, or depending on the protocol by an active network attacker (person in the middle). |
| RAUC controls the update process on embedded Linux systems. Prior to version 1.15.2, RAUC bundles using the 'plain' format exceeding a payload size of 2 GiB cause an integer overflow which results in a signature which covers only the first few bytes of the payload. Given such a bundle with a legitimate signature, an attacker can modify the part of the payload which is not covered by the signature. This issue has been patched in version 1.15.2. |
| An unauthenticated remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in applications that use the Replicator node package manager (npm) version 1.0.5 to deserialize untrusted user input and execute the resulting object. |
