#go

共收录 201 条相关安全情报。

← 返回所有主题
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2

> [!NOTE] > **This feature has been disabled by default for all installations from v2.33.8 onwards, including for existent installations**. To exploit this vulnerability, the instance administrator must turn on a feature and ignore all the warnings about known vulnerabilities. We're publishing this new advisory to make it clear that all vulnerabilities concerning this feature are disclosed. > > Fo

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

### Summary File Browser's public share handlers rebase the share owner's filesystem root to the shared directory and then evaluate descendant paths against the owner's global and per-user rules using the rebased relative path instead of the original path relative to the owner's scope. As a result, an attacker who knows a public directory share URL can access files and subdirectories that the own

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

### Summary filebrowser builds the download-as-zip / download-as-tar archive entry names with `filepath.ToSlash`, which on a Linux host is a no-op for backslashes (`\` is only a path separator on Windows). A file whose name contains Windows-style traversal (`..\..\..\evil.txt`) is accepted by the resource handlers, stored on the Linux filesystem with a literal backslash name, and then emitted **ve

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

## Summary File Browser enforces per-user scope with `afero.NewBasePathFs(afero.NewOsFs(), scope)`, set up in `users/users.go`. This blocks lexical `../` traversal, but it does not stop the HTTP file handlers from following symbolic links before they open, serve, write, share, or list a file. As a result, a scoped user — and in some cases an unauthenticated public-share recipient — can cross the

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

### Summary Unchecked passwords maximums allow for an arbitrarily large password to be passed into the login API. This spikes CPU and memory, and after testing, crashes, heavily lags any container created, and has even made my docker daemon start to send errors with status code 500 even after the container was destroyed. ### Details When sending JSON in the body of the request to the route `api/l

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

### Summary This is similar vulnrability of **`CVE-2026-0035`**, which was fixed in Android `MediaProvider` with **high** severity. In the original Java issue, `MediaStore.createWriteRequest()` accepted attacker-controlled URIs and created a future grant even when the referenced media item did not exist yet. The Android fix added an existence check before creating the request. `filebrowser/filebr

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser, github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2

### Summary A low-privileged authenticated user of filebrowser (with `create` + `delete` permissions in their own isolated scope) can silently destroy share-link records belonging to any other user — including the administrator — by performing a legitimate DELETE on a file in their own directory whose logical path happens to be a byte-prefix of another user's stored `share.Link.Path`. The file con

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4

### Summary A vulnerability in Fleet's Apple MDM commands listing endpoint allowed authenticated users with the lowest-privilege Observer role to extract sensitive values from joined database tables — including host enrollment secrets and Apple Push Notification Service (APNS) tokens — through a cursor-based binary search oracle. The endpoint accepted a user-supplied `order_key` parameter that wa

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4

### Summary A vulnerability in Fleet's labels host-listing endpoint allowed authenticated users with the lowest-privilege Observer role to extract host enrollment secrets (`node_key`, `orbit_node_key`) through a cursor-based binary search oracle. The endpoint accepted a user-supplied `order_key` parameter that was not validated against a column allowlist, permitting sort order to be driven by sen

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/radius-project/radius

# Radius Controller May Delete a Container Resource via an Injected Deployment Annotation (Multi-Tenant Installs) ## Summary A configuration-validation issue in the Radius Kubernetes controller can cause it to issue a `DELETE` for the container resource referenced by a tampered `radapp.io/status` annotation on a Deployment. It follows the "Confused Deputy" pattern. Real-world impact is bounded a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/awssql/v2, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/xray, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/aws-secrets-manager, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/custom-endpoint, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/federated-auth, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/iam, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/mysql-driver, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/okta, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/pgx-driver, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/otlp, github.com/aws/aws-advanced-go-wrapper/auth-helpers

Aurora PostgreSQL is a fully managed relational database engine that's compatible with PostgreSQL. An issue in Aurora PostgreSQL using the AWS Go Wrapper waa identified, see CVE-2026-11401. Impact An issue in AWS Wrappers for Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL may allow for privilege escalation to rds_superuser role. A low privilege authenticated user can create a crafted function that could be executed

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/openfga/openfga

### Description In OpenFGA, when iterator caching is enabled, two distinct check requests can produce the same cache key, leading to OpenFGA reusing an earlier cached result for a subsequent request. ### Preconditions This applies if the following preconditions are present: - FGA runs with SharedIteratorCache enabled, - FGA runs with ListObjectsIteratorCache enabled. ### Fix Upgrade to version

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/l3montree-dev/devguard

### Impact On a DevGuard API instance with one or more **public assets**, any authenticated user — including users from a different organization with no membership or role in the affected org/project — can create, update, reapply, and delete **VEX rules** on those public assets. The same flaw affects the other vulnerability-triage write endpoints exposed under a public asset, including: - VEX ru

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/basekick-labs/arc

### Summary Arc registers Go's `net/http/pprof` handlers at `/debug/pprof/*` via `app.Use(pprof.New())` in `internal/api/server.go`, and `/debug/pprof` is added to `PublicPrefixes` in `cmd/arc/main.go`. The auth middleware short-circuits before the token check on prefix match, so the endpoints are reachable without any authentication. ### Impact Any network-reachable caller (no token required)

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/traefik/traefik/v2, github.com/traefik/traefik/v3

## Summary There is a high severity vulnerability in Traefik's `StripPrefix` middleware that allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass route-level authentication and authorization. When a public router matches on a `PathPrefix` rule and applies the `StripPrefix` middleware, a request path containing `..` or its percent-encoded form `%2e%2e` can match the public route at routing time and then,

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/udr

### Summary The free5GC UDR accepts arbitrary non-3GPP ueId values in the EE subscription creation and query flows because the regular expression used for validation ends with the catch-all alternative |.+. This causes the validation logic to accept any non-empty string rather than restricting input to expected SUPI/GPSI-style formats. In a tested deployment, a crafted value such as ARBITRARY_STRI

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/dexidp/dex

## Summary `server/handlers.go::handleTokenExchange` (lines 1804-1893) does not call `isConnectorAllowed(client.AllowedConnectors, connID)` before issuing tokens, while sibling handlers do. This is a per-client connector ACL gap on the token-exchange endpoint; the redirect-flow paths enforce the same field correctly. ## Affected code path `handleTokenExchange` reads `connector_id` from the requ

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/basekick-labs/arc

### Summary Arc's user-SQL validator (`internal/api/query.go:ValidateSQLRequest`) blocked only `read_parquet(` and `arc_partition_agg(` via regex denylist. The broader DuckDB I/O function family — `read_csv_auto`, `read_csv`, `read_json`, `read_json_auto`, `read_text`, `read_blob`, `glob`, `parquet_metadata`, `parquet_schema`, `read_xlsx`, etc. — was not blocked. RBAC table-reference extraction i

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/juev/nebula-mesh

`internal/api/audit.go:12` — `handleGetAuditLog` does no admin check. The route is bearer-auth gated only; any operator API key returns the full audit log via `store.ListAuditEntries` (up to limit=1000). This includes cross-tenant actor names, host/CA/operator IDs, action timestamps, and masked-IP entries from rate-limit refusals — enough surface for a tenant to enumerate the server's activity, in

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/juev/nebula-mesh

Every `/ui/*` POST / PUT / PATCH / DELETE route processes the request as soon as the session cookie validates. `SameSite=Lax` on the session cookie prevents most cross-site form submits but does not protect: - top-level form-submit navigations from third-party pages (some browsers still send Lax cookies on top-level POSTs) - same-registrable-domain attackers (sibling-subdomain XSS, subdomain take

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/juev/nebula-mesh

The `/api/v1/*` route surface trusts the bearer token alone for authorisation on most endpoints. The codebase itself admits this at `internal/api/hosts.go:384`: *"API trusts the bearer token for authorisation; per-CA ownership is enforced only in the Web layer."* The Web UI gates state-changing routes through `loadAccessibleCA` (`internal/web/cas.go`); CA-management endpoints in `internal/api/cas

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.9) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/juev/nebula-mesh

None of the response paths in `internal/web/` or `internal/api/` set the standard browser-security headers. `grep` for `Content-Security-Policy`, `X-Frame-Options`, `Strict-Transport-Security`, `X-Content-Type-Options`, `Referrer-Policy` returns zero matches across the codebase. ## Impact The admin UI signs CA certificates, mints API keys (returned inline once per page), displays TOTP QR codes, a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/juev/nebula-mesh

`internal/configgen/generator.go:86,108,119` interpolates the operator-supplied `ListenHost` and `TunDevice` fields raw into a `text/template` that produces the agent's `config.yml`. `internal/web/advanced.go:20-35` accepts both with only `strings.TrimSpace` — no character or shape validation. ## Exploit An operator (or attacker with any operator key, given the cross-tenant CRUD advisory) sets `a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/julien040/anyquery/plugins/chrome, github.com/julien040/anyquery/plugins/brave, github.com/julien040/anyquery/plugins/edge, github.com/julien040/anyquery/plugins/safari

# AppleScript/JXA Code Injection via Unescaped URL in macOS Chrome Plugin | Field | Value | | ---------------- | ----- | | Repository | julien040/anyquery | | Affected version | 0.4.4 (commit 0abd460) | | Vulnerability | CWE-94 — Improper Control of Generation of Code | | Severity | High | ## Summary The `chrome_tabs` plugin (and equivalent Brave/Edge/Safari variants

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/klever-io/klever-go

## Summary Every transaction gossiped on the klever-go P2P network is decoded and validated synchronously inside the libp2p pubsub topic-validator callback. The validator `txVersionChecker.CheckTxVersion` dereferences `tx.RawData.Version` with no nil check. A protobuf `Transaction` whose embedded `RawData` sub-message is omitted decodes to `RawData == nil`, so validating it triggers a nil-pointer

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/klever-io/klever-go

### Summary The Klever seednode REST API starts a Gin engine with `Engine.Run(restAPIInterface)`. In Gin v1.9.1, `Engine.Run` calls Go's default `http.ListenAndServe`, which constructs an HTTP server without application-level `ReadHeaderTimeout`, `ReadTimeout`, or `MaxHeaderBytes` limits. An unauthenticated client that can reach a REST listener bound with Klever's documented `--rest-api-interfac

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/klever-io/klever-go

### Summary `networkMessenger.directMessageHandler` in `network/p2p/libp2p/netMessenger.go` spawns a fresh goroutine for every incoming direct message before the antiflood layer makes an admission decision. There is no semaphore, throttler, or bound on concurrent in-flight spawns. A single connected libp2p peer can open a `DirectSendID` stream and send well-formed `TopicMessage` envelopes with v

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/klever-io/klever-go

## Summary The account-data trie syncers leak bounded throttler slots on error paths in `syncDataTrie()`. Each failed trie sync permanently consumes one slot from the `NumGoRoutinesThrottler`, and the slot is never returned unless the sync succeeds or the root hash was already present. I confirmed this on the current default branch `develop` at commit `9640d63` (observed on May 20, 2026).

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/fluxcd/source-controller

### Impact An actor with the ability to influence the contents of a bucket referenced by a `Bucket` resource can cause source-controller to write fetched object data to paths outside the per-reconciliation working directory. The corruption surface is bounded by source-controller's own and downstream Flux controllers' digest verification: source-controller verifies stored artifact digests during

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/quic-go/quic-go

## Summary An attacker can cause excessive memory allocation in quic-go's HTTP/3 client and server implementations by sending a QPACK-encoded HEADERS frame that decodes into a large trailer field section with many unique field names and/or large values. The implementation builds an `http.Header` for the corresponding `http.Request` or `http.Response`, while only enforcing limits on the size of th

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

#### Summary Nezha accepts service-monitor `TaskResult` messages from an authenticated agent based only on whether the reported service ID exists. The dashboard authenticates the agent and derives the reporter server ID from the gRPC stream, but the service-monitor result worker does not verify that the reporter server was selected for that service, belongs to the service owner, or was actually a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

#### Summary An authenticated Nezha dashboard user can create or update a DDNS profile with provider `webhook` and configure an arbitrary `webhook_url`, HTTP method, request body, and headers. When DDNS is triggered for a server that uses that profile, the dashboard process sends the configured request with `utils.HttpClient` without the SSRF protections used by notification webhooks. This allow

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/authelia/authelia/v4

### Impact **CVSSv4 Baseline Score:** Moderate 6.3 **CVSSv4 Weighted Score:** Low 2.9 The full CVSSv4 Vector for this vulnerability is: > CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:L/IR:L/AR:L/MAV:N/MAC:H/MAT:N/MPR:N/MUI:N/MVC:L/MVI:N/MVA:N/MSC:N/MSI:N/MSA:N/S:N/AU:Y/R:U/V:D/RE:L/U:Green **CVSSv3.1 Baseline Score:** Low 3.7 **CVSSv3.1 Overall Score:** Medium 4.0

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
goauthentik.io

### Summary authentik's SAML Source ACS endpoint is vulnerable to XML Signature Wrapping when validating upstream SAML responses. An attacker with any account at the upstream IdP can reuse a valid signed assertion to authenticate as another federated user. ### Patches authentik 2026.5.1, 2026.2.4 and 2025.12.6 fix this issue. ### Impact Affected: authentik deployments using a SAML S

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/go-git/go-git/v5, github.com/go-git/go-git/v6

### Impact Several denial-of-service issues were identified in `go-git` when parsing maliciously crafted Git repository data. An attacker may craft a malicious `.pack`, `.idx` or loose objects that causes an application using an affected version of `go-git` to panic or consume excessive resources. This can lead to denial of service in applications that use `go-git` to clone, fetch, open, or othe

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 9.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/metal3-io/cluster-api-provider-metal3

## Summary CAPM3 is Metal3's Cluster API (CAPI) provider for baremetal provisioning in Kubernetes. Multiple cross-namespace access control vulnerabilities in Cluster API Provider Metal3 allow users with permissions to create or modify CAPM3 resources in one namespace to reference, read, or claim resources belonging to other namespaces. ## Patched In - **v1.13.0** (main branch — all fixes includ

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers

### Summary In the runtime-rs standalone virtio-fs path, verified here with QEMU (and verified with Cloud Hypervisor too), Kata Containers runs host `virtiofsd` as root with: ``` --sandbox none --seccomp none ``` If an attacker has root-equivalent execution inside the Kata guest VM, they can send raw FUSE requests directly to the host `virtiofsd`. With the tested runtime-rs virtio-fs configurat

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/crowdsecurity/crowdsec

## Summary The CrowdSec AppSec component fails to read the HTTP request body for any request whose `Content-Length` is not positive — most notably HTTP/1.1 requests using `Transfer-Encoding: chunked` and HTTP/2 requests sent without a `content-length` header. Coraza is then evaluated against an empty body, so every WAF rule targeting `REQUEST_BODY`, `BODY_ARGS`, `ARGS_POST`, `JSON`, or `XML` sile

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 16.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/crowdsecurity/crowdsec

The LAPI router uses `gin-contrib/gzip` with `DefaultDecompressHandle` globally (`pkg/apiserver/controllers/controller.go`). This middleware decompresses incoming request bodies without enforcing a maximum decompressed size. The endpoints `/v1/watchers` or `/v1/watchers/login` require no authentication. An attacker can send small gzip-compressed JSON payloads that, when decompressed, result in h

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers

## Summary Kata Containers ships with a default configuration that allows pod creators to inject arbitrary command-line arguments into the virtiofsd process through the `io.katacontainers.config.hypervisor.virtio_fs_extra_args` pod annotation. By injecting `-o source=/` along with `--no-announce-submounts` and `--sandbox=none`, an attacker can override the virtiofsd shared directory to serve the

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

Nezha Monitoring 是一个开源监控系统,其仪表板 WebSocket 端点存在授权绕过漏洞(CVE-2026-47124)。任何经过认证的非管理员成员都可以连接到 `/api/v1/ws/server` WebSocket 并接收所有服务器的遥测数据,包括其他用户拥有的服务器。正常情况下,REST API `/api/v1/server` 会通过 `HasPermission` 按用户过滤服务器列表,但 WebSocket 处理函数 `serverStream` 仅检查用户是否已认证,未验证用户角色或服务器所有权。对于已认证用户,它会调用 `GetSortedList()` 返回所有服务器,并且不隐藏主机详情,导致敏感信息泄露。泄露的数据包括服务器 ID、名称、主机 IP、平台版本、Agent 版本、CPU/GPU 名称、内存/磁盘/交换总量、架构、虚拟化信息、启动时间、CPU 负载、内存/磁盘/交换使用率、网络传输/速度、运行时间、TCP/UDP/进程计数、温度以及 GPU 利用率等。该漏洞影响所有默认部署的 Nezha 仪表板,攻击者只需拥有一个非管理员账户即可利用。

💡 风险点: 漏洞允许任何已验证的非管理员用户跨租户窃取所有服务器的详细遥测数据,包括主机敏感信息,可能导致内部网络拓扑泄露和进一步攻击。

🎯 建议动作: 升级 Nezha Monitoring 至已修复版本,或应用官方补丁;限制非管理员用户的 WebSocket 访问权限;审查并加强 API 授权逻辑,确保 WebSocket 端点也进行对象级权限检查。

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 厂商评估 High (+3) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

Nezha监控系统存在一个严重的权限绕过漏洞(CVE-2026-46716)。该组件是一个开源的服务器监控和运维管理平台,支持管理员(RoleAdmin)和普通成员(RoleMember)两种角色。漏洞位于定时任务相关的API端点(POST /api/v1/cron 和 PATCH /api/v1/cron/:id),这些端点本应仅限管理员访问,但实际使用了仅验证JWT令牌的`commonHandler`中间件,而未使用检查管理员角色的`adminHandler`。此外,在创建定时任务时,权限校验逻辑存在空列表绕过:当`Servers`字段为空数组时,`CheckPermission`函数直接返回`true`。攻击者可以以普通成员身份创建一个`Cover=CronCoverAll`且`Servers=[]`的定时任务,并附上任意shell命令。任务触发时,该命令会被推送到全局`ServerShared`中的所有服务器,包括其他租户(管理员或其他成员)的服务器。攻击者通过配置自定义通知组,可以将命令执行结果发送到外部Webhook,从而实现跨租户的远程代码执行。该漏洞影响`50dc8e660326b9f22990898142c58b7a5312b42a`及之前版本。

💡 风险点: 任何拥有普通成员权限的用户(包括通过OAuth2自注册的用户),都可以利用此漏洞获得所有被监控服务器的远程控制权,实现跨租户横向移动,严重威胁数据安全和系统可用性。

🎯 建议动作: 立即升级到修复版本;如无法立即升级,可临时移除或禁用`POST /api/v1/cron`和`PATCH /api/v1/cron/:id`路由,或限制普通成员的定时任务创建权限;审计当前已存在的定时任务,确认是否存在可疑的命令或覆盖范围。

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.9) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 90%
github.com/getarcaneapp/arcane/backend

Arcane 后端项目中,`PUT /api/environments/{id}/templates/variables` 端点用于写入全局 `.env.global` 文件,该文件中的变量会被所有项目的 Docker Compose 文件引用。该端点缺少管理员权限检查,仅验证了用户身份(通过 Bearer JWT 或 API Key),但未执行角色校验(未调用 `checkAdmin` 函数)。因此,任何经过身份验证的非管理员用户都可以调用此端点,覆盖全局环境变量。攻击者可通过设置恶意值(如 `REGISTRY`、`IMAGE`、`DATABASE_URL`、`SECRET_KEY` 等)来劫持其他用户的容器镜像拉取(导致供应链远程代码执行)、窃取数据库凭证或破坏所有项目。与代码库中其他管理员敏感端点(如用户管理、事件管理、设置等)不同,这些端点都通过 `checkAdmin` 进行了角色检查,而此端点遗漏了。UI 层面已将“变量”功能对非管理员隐藏,但后端未强制实施。该漏洞编号为 CVE-2026-47125,影响 GitHub 上的 getarcaneapp/arcane/backend 组件。

💡 风险点: 该漏洞允许任意认证用户覆盖全局变量,可能导致供应链攻击、凭据窃取或服务中断。由于影响所有项目且无需高权限,一旦被利用将造成严重危害。

🎯 建议动作: 1. 立即升级 Arcane 后端到修复版本(关注官方公告)。2. 检查系统全局变量配置是否存在异常修改。3. 审计访问日志,确认是否有非授权用户调用该端点。4. 在补丁发布前,可考虑在网络层面限制对 API 的访问或临时移除该端点。

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

## Summary `createAlertRule` and `createService` (and their `update*` siblings) accept `FailTriggerTasks []uint64` and `RecoverTriggerTasks []uint64` — IDs of cron tasks to fire when the alert/service trips. The validation function only validates the alert's `Rules.Ignore` server map; it never checks that the cron task IDs in `FailTriggerTasks` / `RecoverTriggerTasks` belong to the caller. When

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/nezhahq/nezha

## Summary nezha's dashboard supports two user roles: `RoleAdmin` (Role==0) and `RoleMember` (Role==1). The notification routes `POST /api/v1/notification` and `PATCH /api/v1/notification/:id` are wired through `commonHandler` rather than `adminHandler` — so a `RoleMember` user can call them. These handlers synchronously `Send()` an HTTP request to a user-controlled URL and reflect the *entire* r

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gtsteffaniak/filebrowser/backend

## Summary `publicPatchHandler` in `backend/http/public.go` joins user-controlled `fromPath` and `toPath` body fields with the trusted `d.share.Path` BEFORE the downstream sanitizer runs. Because `filepath.Join` collapses `..` segments during the join, the sanitizer in `resourcePatchHandler` never sees the traversal and the move/copy/rename operates on a path outside the shared directory. The sam

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
boxlite, boxlite-cli, @boxlite-ai/boxlite, github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/sdks/go

#### Summary Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and run OCI containers within them. Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.6) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 15.4
Conf: 50%
boxlite, @boxlite-ai/boxlite, github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/sdks/go, boxlite-cli

#### Summary Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. One of the core security features claimed by Boxlite is the ability to mount host directories in read-only mode (read_only=True) into the VM via the virtiofs protocol (a host-guest shared filesystem protocol designed specifically

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/containerd/containerd, github.com/containerd/containerd/v2

### Impact A bug was found in containerd where containers launched with a numeric `User` directive that cannot be parsed as a 32-bit integer are incorrectly treated as a username. If a crafted image provides an `/etc/passwd` file mapping this large numeric string to root, the container ultimately runs as root (UID 0). This allows the Kubernetes `runAsNonRoot` restriction to be bypassed, causing un

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/authzed/spicedb

### Impact Users are impacted if: - They have a caveat structure with a nested list, e.g.: ```zed caveat shape(x list) { x == [["a"], "b"] } ``` - Their system exercises that caveat with either [CheckBulkPermission](https://buf.build/authzed/api/docs/main%3Aauthzed.api.v1#authzed.api.v1.PermissionsService.CheckBulkPermissions) or else [LookupResources](https://buf.build/authzed/api/d

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/opentofu/opentofu

### Impact Unauthenticated denial of service. ### Summary When installing provider or module packages from attacker-controlled servers, the server may cause `tofu init`to enter an infinite loop sending garbage data to that server. Those who depend on modules or providers served from untrusted third-party servers may experience denial of service due to `tofu init` failing to complete successfull

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/xyproto/algernon

### Summary The SSE event server's `Access-Control-Allow-Origin` response header was hardcoded to the wildcard `*` regardless of the caller's `Origin`. Because `EventSource` does not preflight and does not send cookies, the wildcard is sufficient to let any third-party page the developer visits open a cross-origin `EventSource` to the SSE port and read the live filename stream from JavaScript. Co

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/xyproto/algernon

### Summary The SSE event server bound to `0.0.0.0:5553` on Linux/macOS by default because the platform-dependent host default in `engine/flags.go:39-46` set `host = ""` for non-Windows, and `utils.JoinHostPort("", ":5553")` resolves to `":5553"` — a Go `http.Server.Addr` of `":5553"` listens on every interface. On Windows the same code chose `"localhost"`, binding loopback only. The result was

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 16.4
Conf: 50%
pkg.jsn.cam/caddy-defender

### Impact Caddy Defender used `r.RemoteAddr` when evaluating whether a request should be blocked. `RemoteAddr` is the address of the immediate peer connected to Caddy. In deployments where Caddy is behind a trusted proxy, CDN, or load balancer, the immediate peer is usually the proxy, not the original client. Caddy resolves the original client address into its `client_ip` request variable after

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/gtsteffaniak/filebrowser/backend, github.com/gtsteffaniak/filebrowser

### Impact Some sensitive info -- such as source and path can get exposed. ### Patches Update to the latest version ### Workarounds no

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/tomwright/dasel/v3

### Summary `dasel`'s selector lexer enters a non-terminating loop when tokenizing an unterminated regex pattern such as `r/abc`. A 2-byte input (`r/`) is sufficient to cause the tokenizer to consume 100% CPU on one core indefinitely. I confirmed the issue on `v3.3.1` (`fba653c7f248aff10f2b89fca93929b64707dfc8`) and on `master` commit `0dd6132e0c58edbd9b1a5f7ffd00dfab1e6085ad`. I also verified t

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/tomwright/dasel/v3

### Summary `dasel`'s selector lexer panics with an index-out-of-range error when tokenizing a quoted string that ends with a trailing backslash (e.g., `"\` or `'\`). A 2-byte input causes an immediate process crash via Go runtime panic. I confirmed the issue on `v3.3.1` (`fba653c7f248aff10f2b89fca93929b64707dfc8`) and on `master` commit `0dd6132e0c58edbd9b1a5f7ffd00dfab1e6085ad`. I also verifie

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/coder/coder/v2, github.com/coder/coder

## Summary `azureidentity.Validate()` verifies that the PKCS#7 signer certificate chains to a trusted Azure CA but never verifies the PKCS#7 signature itself. An attacker can embed a legitimate Azure certificate alongside arbitrary content e.g. `{"vmId":""}` and the forged `vmId` will be accepted returning the victim workspace agent's session token. **No authentication is required.** The attacke

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.1) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 16.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/coder/coder/v2, github.com/coder/coder

## Summary Unauthenticated semi-blind Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the Azure instance identity endpoint (`POST /api/v2/workspaceagents/azure-instance-identity`). An external attacker can force the Coder server to issue HTTP GET requests to arbitrary internal or external hosts by submitting a crafted PKCS#7 signature. The server does not return the target's response body, but error messa

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/Kuadrant/mcp-gateway

## Summary The MCP router (ext_proc) exposes an `initialize`-method code path that, when a request carries an `mcp-init-host` header, bypasses the gateway JWT session validator and rewrites the upstream `:authority` header to whatever the caller chooses, gated only by a single shared header value (`router-key`). The shared value is * a literal string (`secret-api-key`) baked into `cmd/mcp-broke

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/cli/cli/v2, github.com/cli/cli

### Summary A security vulnerability has been identified in GitHub CLI that could allow terminal escape sequence injection when users view GitHub Actions workflow logs using `gh run view --log` or `gh run view --log-failed`. ### Details The vulnerability stems from the way GitHub CLI handles raw Actions log output. The `gh run view --log` and `gh run view --log-failed` commands stream workflow

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/caddyserver/caddy/v2

## AI Disclosure I used an LLM to help review the source code, reason about attack surface, and help draft and refine this report. I manually validated the finding by reproducing it locally, confirming the vulnerable code path, and verifying the HTTP behavior with `curl -v`. ## Summary Caddy's remote admin access control performs path authorization using prefix matching: - [`admin.go

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
INFO
ADVISORY 2026-05-19

Caddy CVE-2026-30852 Fix Bypass

推荐 14.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/caddyserver/caddy/v2

# ## TL;DR CVE-2026-30852 fixed double expansion in `vars_regexp` when the variable key is a placeholder (e.g. `{http.vars.x}`). The fix does NOT protect literal key names (e.g. `tenant_id`). An attacker injects `{env.AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY}` or `{file./etc/passwd}` via a request header → Caddy expands it on the second pass → secrets leaked in response headers. **Affected:** Caddy v2.11.0 throu

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/kong/kubernetes-ingress-controller/v3, github.com/kong/kubernetes-ingress-controller/v2, github.com/kong/kubernetes-ingress-controller

## Summary A vulnerability in the Kong Ingress Controller (KIC) allows for the unauthorized exfiltration of TLS certificates and private keys across Kubernetes namespace boundaries. In "managed" mode (where the `GatewayClass` lacks an unmanaged annotation), the Gateway TLS translator skips critical status checks. This bypass allows the translator to fetch Secrets from any namespace KIC watches, e

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary A remotely reachable integer overflow in OBI's memcached text protocol parser can crash the OBI process and cause denial of service. When parsing memcached storage commands such as `set`, `add`, `replace`, `append`, `prepend`, or `cas`, OBI accepts extremely large `` values and adds the payload delimiter length without checking for overflow. A crafted request with `` set to `math.MaxI

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary Malformed MongoDB wire messages can trigger uncaught panics in the MongoDB TCP parser, allowing a remote unauthenticated attacker to crash the telemetry agent and cause a denial of service. The parser operates on raw attacker-controlled network payloads before the input is fully validated, so a single crafted message can terminate telemetry collection for the affected process or node.

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary OBI's log enricher mishandles `writev` buffers by reading only the first `iovec` entry but using the total `iov_iter.count` as the copy length. When log injection is enabled, a crafted multi-segment `writev` call can make OBI read and overwrite memory beyond the first segment. ### Details In [bpf/logenricher/logenricher.c#L50](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-ins

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary The custom `CappedConcurrentHashMap` introduced for Java TLS state tracking never removes keys from its insertion-order queue when entries are deleted. In long-running instrumented JVMs, repeated connection churn can therefore grow the queue without bound and exhaust heap memory. ### Details The vulnerable implementation is in [pkg/internal/java/agent/src/main/java/io/opentelemetry/

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary The Java TLS ioctl probe reads user-controlled ioctl pointers with `bpf_probe_read` instead of `bpf_probe_read_user`. An instrumented local process can therefore point OBI at kernel memory and cause that memory to be copied into telemetry. ### Details The vulnerable path is in [bpf/generictracer/java_tls.c](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation/blob/36

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary The per-CPU message-buffer fallback path uses a 256-byte backup buffer but preserves the original payload size, which can be up to 8KB. If a CPU mismatch occurs, OBI can read beyond the fallback buffer and leak adjacent memory into telemetry. ### Details https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation/blob/032473449b53d9f02ec4619d4f5b84e6a81db362/bpf/common/http

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary OBI replays BPF probe hits into histogram observations by looping once per recorded run count. On busy systems, the run-count delta can become very large, causing the metrics exporter to spend excessive CPU time in a tight loop every collection interval. ### Details The vulnerable loop is in [pkg/export/prom/prom_bpf.go](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumen

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary The Postgres protocol parser assumes `BIND` message payloads contain a valid NUL-terminated portal name. A crafted empty or unterminated payload can make OBI slice beyond the end of the captured buffer and panic. ### Details The vulnerable logic is in [pkg/ebpf/common/sql_detect_postgres.go](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-ebpf-instrumentation/blob/d5691806adc98008ba

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary OBI exports raw Redis error text as the span status message. Because Redis error replies can contain attacker-controlled or sensitive values, this behavior can exfiltrate tokens, PII, or other confidential input into telemetry backends and inject untrusted text into downstream analysis systems. ### Details In [pkg/ebpf/common/redis_detect_transform.go](https://github.com/open-teleme

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.opentelemetry.io/obi

### Summary OBI's replacement ELF parser trusts section offsets, counts, and string offsets from the executable file. A crafted local ELF can make OBI dereference invalid section pointers or slice past string tables, causing the agent to panic while determining the process language. ### Details `matchExeSymbols `iterates over sections and uses offsets/symbol names from the unvalidated `fastelf

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/docker/docker, github.com/moby/moby/v2, github.com/moby/moby

## Summary A race condition during `docker cp` mount setup allows a malicious container to redirect a bind mount target to an arbitrary host path, potentially overwriting host files or causing denial of service. ## Details When copying files into a container, the daemon sets up a temporary filesystem view by bind-mounting volumes into a private mount namespace. During this setup, the mount dest

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/docker/docker, github.com/moby/moby/v2, github.com/moby/moby

## Summary A race condition during `docker cp` mount setup allows a malicious container to create empty files or directories at arbitrary absolute paths on the host filesystem. This advisory covers the race during mountpoint creation. The related race during the subsequent mount syscall is tracked in GHSA-rg2x-37c3-w2rh ## Details When copying files into a container, the daemon sets up a tempo

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/moby/moby/v2, github.com/docker/docker, github.com/moby/moby

## Summary When a user uploads a compressed archive into a container, a malicious image can execute arbitrary code with daemon (host root) privileges. ## Details When handling `PUT /containers/{id}/archive` requests with compressed archives, the daemon decompresses them using external system binaries. Due to incorrect ordering of operations, these binaries are resolved from the container's file

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/DatanoiseTV/tinyice

## Title Missing authentication on WebRTC ingest endpoint allows unauthenticated stream injection in TinyIce ## Ecosystem / Package - **Ecosystem:** `Go` (or "Other" — TinyIce is shipped as a Go binary, not a Go module published to a registry) - **Package name:** `github.com/DatanoiseTV/tinyice` ## Affected versions ``` >= 0.8.95, = 2.5.0 ``` ## Severity - **CVSS 3.1 base score:** 7.4 (High

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/amir20/dozzle

## Summary In a default dozzle deploy (the documented quickstart, no `DOZZLE_AUTH_PROVIDER` set), `POST /api/notifications/test-webhook` is reachable without authentication and forwards an attacker-controlled URL into a `WebhookDispatcher` that: - Sends an HTTP POST to the supplied URL with attacker-controlled request headers, and - Returns the response status code AND up to 1MB of the response

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/iskorotkov/avro/v2

# CPU Exhaustion in Avro Decoder via Unbounded Block-Count Iteration ## Summary The Avro array and map decoders looped over an attacker-controlled block-count value without checking the underlying reader's error state inside the loop body. `Reader.ReadBlockHeader` returns the count as a Go `int`, which is 64-bit on `amd64` / `arm64` targets — so a producer can declare a block of up to `math.MaxI

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/iskorotkov/avro/v2

# Integer Overflow in Avro Decoder ## Summary Several Avro decoder paths read attacker-controlled 64-bit values from the wire format and either narrowed them to platform-sized `int` before bounds-checking, or summed them with overflow-prone signed-`int` arithmetic. On 32-bit targets (`GOARCH=386`, `arm`, `mips`, `wasm`, etc.), the truncation paths can silently bypass byte-slice limits, select th

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 5.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/iskorotkov/avro/v2

# Memory Exhaustion via Unbounded Map Allocations in Avro Decoder ## Summary The Avro map decoder accepted attacker-controlled block-element counts from the wire format and grew the destination map without enforcing an upper bound. The slice decoder already had `Config.MaxSliceAllocSize` for the equivalent attack against arrays; the map decoder had no analogous limit, so a producer could declare

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/arnika-project/arnika

### Summary Three medium-severity issues in arnika affecting the UDP key-rotation protocol, PQC key file handling, and KMS TLS client. All require specific preconditions to exploit and do not allow direct code execution or immediate key extraction. A self-contained PoC is attached. ### Details 1) ACK timestamp not validated: `udpserver.go:185` `udpClient()` verifies HMAC and packet type but never

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
goshs.de/goshs/v2

### Summary The `--tunnel` / `-t` flag opens an outbound SSH connection to `localhost.run:22` with `HostKeyCallback: ssh.InsecureIgnoreHostKey()`. The Go documentation for that function states verbatim: *"It should not be used for production code."* With the callback disabled the client accepts any host key the server presents, so an attacker who can intercept the operator's TCP connection to `lo

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/dunglas/frankenphp

### Summary The `splitPos()` function in [`cgi.go`](https://github.com/php/frankenphp/blob/main/cgi.go) misuses `golang.org/x/text/search` with `search.IgnoreCase` when the request path contains a non-ASCII byte. Two distinct flaws in that fallback let an attacker mislead FrankenPHP into treating a non-`.php` file as a `.php` script. In any deployment where the attacker can place content into a f

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/slack-go/slack

```go func NewSecretsVerifier(header http.Header, secret string) (SecretsVerifier, error) { hash := hmac.New(sha256.New, []byte(secret)) // raw secret, no precondition } ```

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

### Summary SiYuan's Bazaar (community marketplace) renders the `name` and `version` fields of a package's `plugin.json` (and the equivalent `theme.json` / `template.json` / `widget.json` / `icon.json`) into the Settings → Marketplace UI without HTML escaping. The kernel-side helper `sanitizePackageDisplayStrings` in `kernel/bazaar/package.go` HTML-escapes only `Author`, `DisplayName`, and `Descr

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

### Summary SiYuan publish-mode Reader can mutate Conf and SQL index via 8 ungated APIs `POST /api/graph/getGraph`, `POST /api/graph/getLocalGraph`, `POST /api/sync/setSyncInterval`, `POST /api/storage/updateRecentDocViewTime`, `POST /api/storage/updateRecentDocCloseTime`, `POST /api/storage/updateRecentDocOpenTime`, `POST /api/storage/batchUpdateRecentDocCloseTime`, and `POST /api/search/update

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
gitlab.com/uniget-org/cli

I discovered a command injection vulnerability in uniget that allows arbitrary command execution through the metadata loading and version check mechanism. ### Summary A command injection vulnerability exists in uniget due to unsafe execution of the `check` field from metadata files using `/bin/bash -c`. Because the `check` field is loaded directly from untrusted JSON metadata without validation

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

### Summary The advisory `GHSA-c77m-r996-jr3q` patched `getBookmark` so that, when invoked by a publish-mode `RoleReader`, results are filtered through `FilterBlocksByPublishAccess` to remove entries from password-protected / publish-ignored notebooks. Four sibling search handlers in the same file did not receive the equivalent treatment and continue to expose metadata across the publish-access b

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

### Summary `POST /api/tag/getTag` is registered with `model.CheckAuth` only, omitting both `model.CheckAdminRole` and `model.CheckReadonly`, despite the handler performing a configuration write that is normally guarded by both. Any authenticated user — including publish-service `RoleReader` accounts and `RoleEditor` accounts on a read-only workspace — can call this endpoint with a `sort` argumen

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/obot-platform/obot

## Summary If you have the MCP Server ID, you can connect to the MCP server even if you don't have permissions to the server. The MCP gateway endpoint `/mcp-connect/{mcp_id}` does not enforce Access Control Rules (ACRs). Any authenticated Obot user who possesses an MCP Server ID can connect to that server through the gateway — including making tool calls — regardless of whether they are a member

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.6) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/traefik/traefik/v3, github.com/traefik/traefik/v2, github.com/traefik/traefik

## Summary There is a medium severity vulnerability in Traefik's Kubernetes Gateway API provider that allows a tenant with `HTTPRoute` creation permissions to expose the REST provider handler, bypassing the `providers.rest.insecure=false` setting. The Gateway provider accepts any `TraefikService` backend reference whose name ends with `@internal`, making it possible to route traffic to `rest@inte

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5, github.com/go-git/go-billy/v6

### Impact Multiple components may improperly handle crafted or malformed input, resulting in panics, infinite loops, uncontrolled recursion, or excessive resource consumption. These issues arise from insufficient validation and missing safety mechanisms such as cycle detection, recursion limits, or defensive handling of unexpected states when processing untrusted repository data and filesystem s

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/klever-io/klever-go

## Summary A remote, unauthenticated denial-of-service vulnerability in `Batch.Decompress` (`data/batch/batch.go`) allows any peer that participates in a topic served by `MultiDataInterceptor` to allocate multi-gigabyte heaps on the receiving node from a sub-50 KiB gossip payload. A single packet is sufficient to OOM-kill a validator with conventional memory provisioning. Fleet-wide application a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/esm-dev/esm.sh

### Summary A Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability exists in the esbuild plugin's handling of the `browser` field in `package.json`. An attacker can publish an npm package that causes the server to read and return arbitrary files from the host filesystem during the build process. ### Details The vulnerable code is in the `OnResolve` callback of the esbuild plugin: https://github.com/esm-de

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 12.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/esm-dev/esm.sh

### Impact - Arbitrary File Write – An attacker can cause the server to write data to any file path it has write permission for. - Privilege Escalation / RCE – By overwriting critical binaries or scripts, the attacker can execute arbitrary code with the server’s privileges. ### Exploit The legacy router first retrieves a response from `legacyServer`, parses the incoming request path, and ultimat

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/hahwul/dalfox/v2

## Summary `ParameterAnalysis` in `pkg/scanning/parameterAnalysis.go` runs two sequential worker stages that both write to the same `results` channel. The channel is correctly closed after the first stage completes (`close(results)` at line 438), but the second stage — which processes POST-body parameters (`dp`) — is then launched with the same already-closed channel as its output. When a scanned

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/hahwul/dalfox/v2

## Summary When dalfox is run in REST API server mode, the `output`, `output-all`, and `debug` fields in `model.Options` are JSON-tagged and deserialized directly from the attacker's request body, then propagated unchanged through `dalfox.Initialize` into the scan engine's logging path. The logger opens the attacker-supplied path with `os.O_APPEND|os.O_CREATE|os.O_WRONLY` and writes scan log line

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/hahwul/dalfox/v2

## Summary When dalfox is run in REST API server mode, the `custom-payload-file` field in `model.Options` is JSON-tagged and deserialized directly from the attacker's request body, then propagated unchanged through `dalfox.Initialize` into the scan engine. The engine passes the value to `voltFile.ReadLinesOrLiteral`, which reads lines from any file path accessible to the dalfox process and embeds

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/hahwul/dalfox/v2

# GHSA: Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution via `found-action` in Dalfox Server Mode ## Summary When dalfox is started in REST API server mode (`dalfox server`), the server binds to `0.0.0.0:6664` by default and requires no API key unless the operator explicitly passes `--api-key`. Because `model.Options` — including `FoundAction` and `FoundActionShell` — is deserialized directly from attacker

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/safedep/gryph

Gryph implements logging levels that determine what content is logged to a local sqlite database. The README incorrectly mentions that the default log level is minimal while it is standard. Source code review shows sensitive `file-write` content remains in the stored `payload` as `ContentPreview`, `OldString`, or `NewString` at the default `standard` logging level and at `full`. This leads to log

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `nnef-pfdmanagement` route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can use a forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`) to read PFD application data via `GET /applications` and `GET /applications/{appID}`, and to create or delete PFD change-notification subscr

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/smf

### Summary free5GC's SMF mounts the `UPI` management route group without OAuth2/bearer-token authorization middleware. A network attacker who can reach SMF on the SBI can hit `UPI` endpoints with no `Authorization` header at all, and the requests reach the SMF business handlers. In the running Docker lab this was directly demonstrated for read (`GET /upi/v1/upNodesLinks`), write (`POST /upi/v1/up

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/smf

### Summary free5GC's SMF mounts the `UPI` management route group without inbound OAuth2 middleware (same root cause as the broader UPI auth gap reported in free5gc/free5gc#887). On top of that, the `DELETE /upi/v1/upNodesLinks/{upNodeRef}` handler unconditionally dereferences `upNode.UPF` after the type-guarded async release, even though `AN`-typed nodes are constructed without a `UPF` object. As

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `nnef-oam` route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can hit the OAM route with no `Authorization` header at all and the handler returns `200 OK`. The current OAM handler is a stub that returns `null`, but the structural defect is route-group-scoped: the entire OAM route group has no inbound a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `3gpp-traffic-influence` API without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can create, read, patch, and delete traffic-influence subscriptions either with no `Authorization` header at all, or with a forged bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`). This includes creating `AnyUeInd=true` sub

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.4) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nrf

### Summary free5GC's NRF root SBI endpoint `POST /oauth2/token` contains a parser-level type-confusion bug family. The handler in `NFs/nrf/internal/sbi/api_accesstoken.go` reflects over `models.NrfAccessTokenAccessTokenReq`, special-cases only plain `string` and `NrfNfManagementNfType` fields, and treats every other field as if it were a single `models.PlmnId`. The parsed `*models.PlmnId` is then

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/udr

### Summary free5GC's UDR `nudr-dr` `DELETE /subscription-data/{ueId}/{servingPlmnId}/ee-subscriptions/{subsId}/amf-subscriptions` handler panics on a single authenticated request against a fresh UDR instance when the supplied `ueId` does not exist in `UESubsCollection`. The processor checks `value, ok := udrSelf.UESubsCollection.Load(ueId)` and sets a `404 USER_NOT_FOUND` problem-details on the m

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/udr

### Summary free5GC's UDR `nudr-dr` `DELETE /subscription-data/{ueId}/{servingPlmnId}/ee-subscriptions/{subsId}/amf-subscriptions` handler contains a nil-pointer dereference reachable from a single authenticated request, after one preparatory authenticated EE-subscription create. The handler checks `_, ok = UESubsData.EeSubscriptionCollection[subsId]` and sets a `404` problem-details on the miss p

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF `PATCH /3gpp-pfd-management/v1/{afId}/transactions/{transId}/applications/{appId}` handler panics with a nil-pointer dereference when the upstream UDR call fails AND the consumer wrapper returns `err != nil` together with a nil `*ProblemDetails`. The handler's `errPfdData != nil` branch builds its own `problemDetailsErr` correctly, but immediately after it reads `problemD

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/smf

### Summary free5GC's SMF mounts the `UPI` management route group without inbound OAuth2 middleware (same root cause as free5gc/free5gc#887). The `POST /upi/v1/upNodesLinks` create-or-update handler accepts attacker-controlled JSON and passes it directly into `UpNodesFromConfiguration()`, which calls `logger.InitLog.Fatalf(...)` on several validation failures. One confirmed path is the UE-IP-pool

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `nnef-callback` route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`) is enough to reach the SMF-callback handler -- the callback body is parsed and dispatched into NEF business logic instead of being rejected at the auth boundary. Same root cause as the other NEF SBI fi

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF terminates the entire process when a stored PFD-subscription `notifyUri` cannot be reached. In `PfdChangeNotifier.FlushNotifications()`, the notifier calls `NnefPFDmanagementNotify(...)` and on any delivery error invokes `logger.PFDManageLog.Fatal(err)`, which is `os.Exit(1)`-equivalent in Go. An attacker who can create a PFD subscription with an attacker-chosen `notifyUr

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/bsf

### Summary free5GC's BSF `PUT /nbsf-management/v1/subscriptions/{subId}` handler has an unsynchronized write on the global `Subscriptions` map. The handler first reads the map under `RLock()` via `BSFContext.GetSubscription(subId)`, but if the subscription does not exist, `ReplaceIndividualSubcription()` writes back to the same map directly without taking the mutex (`bsfContext.BsfSelf.Subscripti

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/pcf

### Summary free5GC's PCF `POST /npcf-policyauthorization/v1/app-sessions` handler panics on a single authenticated request whose `ascReqData.suppFeat == "1"` (enabling traffic-routing feature negotiation) and whose `medComponents` entries supply an `afAppId` but NO `AfRoutReq`. The create path then calls `provisioningOfTrafficRoutingInfo(smPolicy, appID, routeReq, ...)` with `routeReq == nil` and

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/pcf

### Summary free5GC's PCF `POST /npcf-smpolicycontrol/v1/sm-policies` handler (`HandleCreateSmPolicyRequest`) panics with a nil-pointer dereference when a downstream OpenAPI consumer call (UDR lookup) returns `404 Not Found` and the consumer wrapper returns `err != nil` together with a nil response struct. The handler logs the OpenAPI error and continues executing instead of returning, then derefe

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/nef

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `3gpp-pfd-management` API without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can create, read, and delete PFD-management transaction state with a forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`). The route group is also reachable even when the running config's `ServiceList` does not

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.4) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/sigstore/gitsign

## Summary `gitsign verify` and `gitsign verify-tag` re-encode commit/tag objects through go-git's `EncodeWithoutSignature` before checking the signature, instead of verifying against the raw git object bytes. For malformed objects with duplicate `tree` headers, git-core and go-git parse different trees: git-core uses the first, go-git uses the second. A signature crafted over the go-git-normaliz

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/in-toto/in-toto-golang

### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ in-toto-golang and in-toto-python both support glob patterns in artifact rules to indicate the artifacts that a rule applies to. Both support negations in character classes to indicate what should *not* be matched, but they used different operators to indicate the negation. in-toto-python uses `!` while in-toto-golang used `^`. A lay

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
volcano.sh/volcano

### Impact The Volcano webhook server does not enforce a size limit on incoming HTTP request bodies. Any in-cluster pod that can reach the webhook endpoint may send an arbitrarily large request body, potentially causing the webhook server to be killed by OOM. All Volcano deployments with the webhook server exposed to in-cluster traffic are affected. ### Patches This issue will be fixed in the fol

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

## Summary The tooltip mouseover handler in `app/src/block/popover.ts` reads `aria-label` via `getAttribute` and passes it through `decodeURIComponent` before assigning to `messageElement.innerHTML` in `app/src/dialog/tooltip.ts:41`. The encoder used at the producer side, `escapeAriaLabel` in `app/src/util/escape.ts:19-25`, only handles HTML special characters (`"`, `'`, `` element, and the `oner

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/Ech0

## Summary Access tokens created with the "never expire" option have no `exp` JWT claim. Three independent revocation mechanisms fail for this token type. Logout at `internal/handler/auth/auth.go:154` and `:163` dereferences `claims.ExpiresAt.Time`, panicking on the nil field so the token never hits the blacklist. `RevokeToken` at `internal/repository/auth/auth.go:45-50` skips when `remainTTL 0

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/Ech0

## Summary `parseAndValidateClientRedirect` at `internal/service/auth/auth.go:448` validates OAuth client-redirect URIs by comparing only scheme and host against the admin-configured allowlist. Path, query, and fragment are ignored. The initiator at `/oauth/:provider/login` embeds the caller-supplied `redirect_uri` verbatim into the signed state JWT without any validation at login time. Alice sub

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/ech0

## Summary The `fetchPeerConnectInfo` function in `internal/service/connect/connect.go:214-239` uses `httpUtil.SendRequest` (no SSRF protection) instead of `SendSafeRequest` (which has `ValidatePublicHTTPURL` with private IP blocking). This allows authenticated users to make the server request arbitrary URLs including internal/cloud metadata endpoints. ## Details In `internal/service/connect/conn

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/Ech0

## Summary `PUT /api/echo/like/:id` at `internal/router/echo.go:12` is registered on `PublicRouterGroup` with no authentication and no rate limit. Anonymous callers increment the `fav_count` counter on any echo (including private echoes) by UUID, repeat the request without deduplication, and trigger a database write plus a four-key cache invalidation on every call. Alice harvests echo UUIDs from

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/ech0

### Summary **No authentication** is required to invoke **`PUT /api/echo/like/:id`**. The handler is registered on the **public** router group. The service increments **`fav_count`** for the given echo **without** checking identity, **without** a per-user limit, and **without** CSRF tokens. A remote client can **arbitrarily inflate** like metrics with repeated requests. ### Description **Root c

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/Ech0

## Summary The public RSS/Atom feed at `/rss` renders two attacker-controlled surfaces without HTML escaping. Tag names flow through `fmt.Appendf(renderedContent, "#%s", tag.Name)` at `internal/service/common/common.go:120`, and the Markdown renderer at `internal/util/md/md.go` does not set the `html.SkipHTML` flag, so raw HTML blocks in echo content pass through unmodified. The resulting Atom ``

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/lin-snow/Ech0

## Summary The `Comment` model serializes its `Email` field through the public comment-listing API. `internal/model/comment/comment.go:33` uses `json:"email"`, while adjacent PII fields (`IPHash`, `UserAgent`) correctly use `json:"-"`. The public endpoints `GET /api/comments?echo_id=X` and `GET /api/comments/public?limit=N` both live on `PublicRouterGroup` with no authentication. Alice retrieves

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend

#### Summary No minimum length or entropy is enforced on the `JWT_SECRET` configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. HS256 secrets below 32 bytes are brute-forceable offline, allowing attackers to recover the signing key and forge valid JWTs for arbitrary users. --- #### Impact An attacker who captures a s

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend

### Description The Note Mark application allows authenticated users to upload assets to notes via `POST /api/notes/{noteID}/assets`, where the asset filename is provided through the `X-Name` HTTP request header. This value is stored directly in the database without any sanitization or validation - no path separator filtering, no directory traversal sequence rejection, and no use of `filepath.Bas

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/gittuf/gittuf

## Summary An attacker with push access to gittuf's Reference State Log (RSL) can roll back the current policy to any previous policy trusted by the current set of root keys. ## Impact gittuf determines the policy to load by inspecting the RSL. Except for the very first policy (which is automatically trusted given gittuf's TOFU model, or verified against manually specified keys), whenever an RS

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gtsteffaniak/filebrowser

## Summary FileBrowser Quantum serves inline SVG files without a `Content-Security-Policy` header, allowing embedded JavaScript in SVG files to execute when accessed via public share links. Verified on v1.3.0-stable. ## Affected product - **Product:** FileBrowser Quantum (`gtsteffaniak/filebrowser`) - **Verified version:** v1.3.0-stable - **Docker image:** gtstef/filebrowser:latest - **Affecte

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gtsteffaniak/filebrowser

### **Summary** Attacker-controlled path input is joined with a trusted base path prior to sanitization, allowing traversal sequences (e.g., ../) to escape the intended shared directory. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker possessing a valid public share hash with delete permissions enabled can delete arbitrary files outside the shared directory within the share owner’s configured storage sc

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.1) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
go.etcd.io/etcd/v3, go.etcd.io/etcd

### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ A vulnerability in etcd allows read access via PrevKv, or lease attachment in Put requests within transaction operations, to bypass RBAC authorization checks. An authenticated user without sufficient read or lease-related permissions may be able to access unauthorized data or attach leases by invoking transaction operations with thes

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/shellhub-io/shellhub

## Summary `GET /api/namespaces/:tenant` returns the full namespace object — including the members list (user IDs, e-mails, roles), settings, and device counts — to any caller authenticated by an **API Key**, for any tenant, regardless of the API Key's own tenant scope. The handler conditionally skips the membership check when the user ID (`X-ID`) is absent, which is exactly the case for API Key

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/daptin/daptin

### Summary A session invalidation vulnerability exists in daptin's authentication system where JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) remain fully valid after a user changes their password. The JWT validation middleware (`CheckJWT`) only verifies token signature, expiry, issuer, and signing algorithm — it does not check whether the token was issued before the most recent password change. The password update cod

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/siderolabs/talos

### Summary A vulnerability in the Linux kernel's algif_aead subsystem (CVE-2026-31431, "copy.fail") allows an unprivileged container workload to corrupt arbitrary file page-cache pages via the AF_ALG crypto interface and splice(). On Talos Linux, this vulnerability can be chained into a complete node compromise: an attacker who can schedule a pod on a worker node can, without any elevated Kubern

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/kubetail-org/kubetail/modules/dashboard, github.com/kubetail-org/kubetail/modules/cli

### Summary Kubetail's dashboard exposes WebSocket endpoints that did not adequately validate the Origin header on connection upgrade. A malicious web page visited by a user with an active Kubetail session could open a WebSocket to the user's dashboard and read their Kubernetes logs in real time. This is a Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking (CSWSH) vulnerability and affects both the desktop deploymen

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/udm

## Summary The free5GC UDM component fails to validate the `supi` path parameter in six GET handlers of the `nudm-sdm` (Subscriber Data Management) service. An unauthenticated attacker can inject control characters into the SUPI parameter, causing UDM to forward a malformed request to UDR and return a `500 Internal Server Error` response that exposes internal infrastructure details. ## Affected

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/ipld/go-ipld-prime

The DAG-CBOR and DAG-JSON decoders recurse on each nested map or list without a depth limit. A payload containing deeply nested collections causes the decoder to recurse once per level, growing the goroutine stack until the Go runtime terminates the process with a fatal stack overflow (distinct from a recoverable panic). For DAG-CBOR, a payload of approximately 2 MB, consisting of repeated `0x81`

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/pcf

### Summary PCF Npcf_SMPolicyControl missing authentication middleware allows unauthenticated access to SM policy handlers and disclosure of subscriber SUPI ### Details In `NewServer()`, the `smPolicyGroup` route group is created and routes are applied without attaching the router authorization middleware. In contrast, other PCF service groups such as `Npcf_PolicyAuthorization` do attach `RouterAu

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/v3

### Summary There is a missing authorization and data-masking gap in Argo CD's ServerSideDiff endpoint that allows an attacker with read-only access to extract plaintext Kubernetes Secret data from etcd via the Kubernetes API server's Server-Side Apply dry-run mechanism. ### Details Argo CD masks Secret data in every endpoint that returns Kubernetes resource state except one. All the other endpoi

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.6) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/amf

### Summary The AMF in Free5GC v4.2.1 does not enforce the concurrent security procedure rules defined in 3GPP TS 33.501 §6.9.5.1. The AMF does not check for ongoing N2 handover procedures before initiating a NAS Security Mode Command, and vice versa. This can lead to mismatches between NAS and AS security contexts in the network and the UE. ### Details **Vulnerability Type:** CWE-358 (Improper

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/free5gc/amf

### Summary The AMF in Free5GC v4.2.1 does not verify the UE Security Capabilities received in NGAP PathSwitchRequest messages against its locally stored values, as mandated by 3GPP TS 33.501 §6.7.3.1. A malicious gNB can overwrite the AMF's stored UE security capabilities with arbitrary values, which are then propagated in PathSwitchRequest Acknowledge messages and subsequent Handover Request mes

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
com.microsoft.kiota:microsoft-kiota-abstractions, Microsoft.Kiota.Abstractions, microsoft-kiota-http, kiota-typescript, github.com/microsoft/kiota-http-go

### Summary The RedirectHandler middleware in microsoft/kiota-java (com.microsoft.kiota:microsoft-kiota-http-okHttp v1.9.0) and other Kiota libraries fails to strip sensitive HTTP headers when following 3xx redirects to a different host or scheme. This vulnerability is present in the RedirectHandlers for: https://github.com/microsoft/kiota-dotnet https://github.com/microsoft/kiota-java https://

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/rancher/fleet

### Impact Fleet's Helm deployer did not fully apply ServiceAccount impersonation in two code paths, allowing a tenant with git push access to a Fleet-monitored repository to read secrets from any namespace on every downstream cluster targeted by their `GitRepo`. **Helm `lookup` bypass:** The Helm template engine ran Kubernetes API queries with the fleet-agent's cluster-admin credentials instead

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.9) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/rancher/rancher

### Impact A vulnerability has been identified in [Rancher's Extensions](https://ranchermanager.docs.rancher.com/integrations-in-rancher/rancher-extensions) where malicious code can be injected in Rancher through a path traversal in the `compressedEndpoint` field inside a `UIPlugin` deployment. A malicious UI extension could abuse that to: - Overwrite Rancher binaries or configuration to inject

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/aws/amazon-ecs-agent

### Summary [Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECS/latest/developerguide/Welcome.html) is a fully managed container orchestration service that enables customers to deploy, manage, and scale containerized applications. An issue exists where, under certain circumstances, improper input validation in the FSx Windows File Server volume mounting process al

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Summary The `/forms/chromium/convert/url` and `/forms/chromium/screenshot/url` routes accept `url=file:///tmp/...` from anonymous callers. The default Chromium deny-list intentionally exempts `file:///tmp/` so HTML/Markdown routes can load their own request-local assets, and those routes apply a per-request `AllowedFilePrefixes` guard to scope the read. The URL routes never set `AllowedFilePre

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

### Summary The default deny-lists used by Gotenberg's `downloadFrom` feature and `webhook` feature are bypassable. Because the filter is regex-based and case-sensitive, an unauthenticated attacker can supply URLs such as `http://[::ffff:127.0.0.1]:...` and reach loopback or private HTTP services that the default deny-list is intended to block. This crosses a real security boundary because an exte

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.4) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Summary The webhook middleware spawns a goroutine that holds a reference to the request's `echo.Context` after the synchronous handler returns `ErrAsyncProcess` and Echo recycles the context back to its `sync.Pool`. When a concurrent request claims the recycled context, `c.Reset()` clears the store. If the webhook goroutine reaches `hardTimeoutMiddleware` at that moment, an unchecked type asse

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Summary Six conversion routes (`pdfengines/merge`, `pdfengines/split`, `libreoffice/convert`, `chromium/convert/url`, `chromium/convert/html`, `chromium/convert/markdown`) accept `stampSource=pdf` + `stampExpression=/path` and `watermarkSource=pdf` + `watermarkExpression=/path` from anonymous callers. The dedicated stamp/watermark routes require an uploaded file when the source type is image o

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Summary `FilterOutboundURL` resolves the hostname, checks the resolved IPs against the private-address deny-list, and returns only the error. It discards the resolved addresses. Chromium later performs its own DNS resolution when it navigates to the URL. An attacker who controls DNS for a hostname with a short TTL returns a public IP on the first query (Gotenberg allows) and a private IP on th

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

### Summary The SSRF hardening shipped in v8.31.0 only covers outbound URLs that Gotenberg's Go code handles — Chromium asset fetches, webhook delivery, and download-from. The LibreOffice conversion endpoint (`/forms/libreoffice/convert`) passes uploaded documents directly to LibreOffice without inspecting their content. LibreOffice then fetches any embedded external URLs on its own, completely b

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

**Summary** The ExifTool metadata write blocklist in Gotenberg v8 can be bypassed using ExifTool's group-prefix syntax, enabling arbitrary file rename, move, hardlink, and symlink creation on the server. This is a bypass of the fix for GHSA-qmwh-9m9c-h36m. **Details** The blocklist in `pkg/modules/exiftool/exiftool.go` filters four dangerous pseudo-tags (`FileName`, `Directory`, `HardLink`, `Sy

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

# Unauthenticated RCE in Gotenberg via Metadata Key Newline Injection ## Summary Gotenberg's `/forms/pdfengines/metadata/write` HTTP endpoint accepts a JSON metadata object and passes its keys directly to ExifTool via the go-exiftool library. No validation is performed on key characters. A `\n` embedded in a JSON key splits the ExifTool stdin stream into a new argument line, allowing an attacker

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.8) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/shellhub-io/shellhub

## Summary The device list endpoint accepts user-controlled identifiers in two places that are passed directly as BSON/SQL keys in the database layer without validation: 1. The `name` field of each filter property in the base64-encoded `filter` query parameter. 2. The `sort_by` query parameter. Any authenticated user can craft payloads that cause the aggregation/query to fail and the AP

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/shellhub-io/shellhub

## Summary `GET /api/sessions/:uid` returns the full session object for any authenticated caller, without scoping by the caller's tenant. An authenticated user can read session records (SSH username, device UID, remote IP, terminal type, authenticated flag, timestamps) belonging to any other namespace. ## Severity **CVSS 3.1: 7.5 (High)** CWE-639 ## Affected versions ShellHub Community v0.24.1

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/shellhub-io/shellhub

## Summary `GET /api/devices/:uid` returns the full device object whenever the caller is authenticated, without verifying that the device belongs to the caller's namespace (tenant). Any authenticated user (JWT or API Key) who knows or can guess a device UID can read device metadata from any other namespace. ## Severity **CVSS 3.1: 7.5 (High)** CWE-639 — Authorization Bypass Through User-Controll

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/getaxonflow/axonflow-sdk-go/v5

## Summary The AxonFlow SDK's `WebhookSubscription` (or equivalent) type did not expose the HMAC-SHA256 signing key returned by the platform's `CreateWebhook` endpoint. Without access to the secret through the typed SDK API, callers had no path to verify the `X-AxonFlow-Signature` header on incoming webhook deliveries. Affected callers had two unsatisfactory options: 1. Skip signature verificati

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/getaxonflow/axonflow

## Summary Eight independently-filed bug fixes in the v7.1.3 → v7.5.0 release window collectively close a set of multi-tenant isolation, access-control, and policy-enforcement defects in the AxonFlow platform. They are filed as a single consolidated advisory because the recommended remediation is a single platform upgrade. ## Affected versions `= 7.5.0`. ## Impact | # | Item | Affected | Patc

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.1) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/canonical/authd

authd 0.6.0 contains [a bug](https://github.com/canonical/authd/issues/1482) which can lead to an incorrect primary group ID. It affects users whose primary group ID (i.e. the GID in the user record) differs from their UID. There are two ways which can lead to this: 1. The user was created with authd &2 continue fi if [ "$OLD_GID" = "$GID" ]; then continue # user not aff

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/prometheus/prometheus

### Impact In the Prometheus server's legacy web UI (enabled via the command-line flag `--enable-feature=old-ui`), the histogram heatmap chart view does not escape `le` label values when inserting them into the HTML for use as axis tick mark labels. An attacker who can inject crafted metrics (e.g. via a compromised scrape target, remote write, or OTLP receiver endpoint) can execute JavaScript in

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/kubewarden/kubewarden-controller

### Impact Kubewarden is a policy engine for Kubernetes. Kubewarden cluster operators can grant permissions to users to deploy namespaced AdmissionPolicies and AdmissionPolicyGroups in their Namespaces. One of Kubewarden promises is that configured users can deploy namespaced policies in a safe manner, without privilege escalation. An attacker with privileged AdmissionPolicy or AdmissionPolicyGro

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/pocketbase/pocketbase

A pre-hijacking issue was discovered with the OAuth2 autolinking by [Alardiians](https://github.com/Alardiians). In some situations, if an attacker knows the email address of the victim they can create and link an **unverified** PocketBase user in advance by authenticating with one of the OAuth2 app providers, e.g. "A". When the victim gets invited or decides to sign up to your app on their own w

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/apernet/hysteria/core/v2

### Summary A specially constructed quic package can crash the server OOM when the sniff is enabled. ### Details When the server has sniff enabled, a valid connection can request the server to forward UDP traffic and construct a huge crypto length. The server will allocate memory according to this length, causing an OOM. ### PoC ``` openssl req -x509 -newkey rsa:2048 -nodes -keyout localhost.

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/l3montree-dev/devguard

### Impact The `SessionMiddleware` accepts a client-supplied `X-Admin-Token` HTTP request header and uses its raw string value as the authenticated `userID` when no Kratos session cookie is present. An unauthenticated attacker who knows or can guess a target user's Kratos identity UUID can issue requests as that user. Where the target user is an organisation `admin` or `owner`, this gives the atta

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/osrg/gobgp/v4

### Summary Remote Denial of Service (DoS) via Nil Pointer Dereference in BGP Update Processing An unauthenticated remote BGP peer can trigger a fatal panic in GoBGP by sending a specially crafted BGP UPDATE message. When the server receives a message with inconsistent attribute lengths, it improperly handles the internal state transition to a "withdraw" action, leading to a nil pointer dereferenc

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI

## Summary An authenticated user can call `GET /api/settings` and retrieve sensitive configuration values, including `node.secret`. The same `node.secret` is accepted by `AuthRequired()` through the `X-Node-Secret` header (or `node_secret` query parameter), causing the request to be treated as authenticated via the trusted-node path and associated with the init user. In my local reproduction on `v

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 11.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3, github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2

## Summary **Description** A Cross-Site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Go Fiber allows a remote attacker to inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript by supplying `Accept: text/html` on any request whose handler passes attacker-influenced data to the AutoFormat() feature. This affects `github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3` (`DefaultRes.AutoFormat`) through version 3.1.0 and `github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2` (`Ct

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/minio/minio

### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ A path traversal vulnerability in MinIO's `ReadMultiple` internode storage-REST endpoint allows a caller holding the cluster root JWT to read files from outside the configured drive roots, bounded only by the MinIO process UID. Distributed-erasure (multi-node) MinIO deployments are impacted. Single-node standalone deployments do no

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/openbao/openbao

### Impact When OpenBao's initial namespace deletion fails, subsequent retries fail to properly remove all data before marking the namespace as deleted. This can affect any outstanding leases as well as potentially leaving unrelated storage entries around. ### Patches This will be patched in OpenBao v2.5.3. ### Workarounds Users may manually remove mounts prior to deleting the namespace. A

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/prometheus/prometheus

### Impact The remote read endpoint (`/api/v1/read`) does not validate the declared decoded length in a snappy-compressed request body before allocating memory. An unauthenticated attacker can send a small payload that causes a huge heap allocation per request. Under concurrent load this can exhaust available memory and crash the Prometheus process. ### Patches _Has the problem been patched? Wha

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/prometheus/prometheus

### Impact Users who use Azure AD remote write with OAuth authentication are impacted. The `client_secret` field in the Azure AD remote write OAuth configuration (`storage/remote/azuread`) was typed as `string` instead of `Secret`. Prometheus redacts fields of type `Secret` when serving the configuration via the `/-/config` HTTP API endpoint. Because the field was a plain string, the Azure OAuth

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
👥 作者: Karolina Gorna, Nicolas Iooss, Yannick Seurin, Rida Khatoun, Keith Makan

本文介绍了 Zorya 符号执行框架的扩展,使其能够处理由 Go 标准 gc 编译器生成的多线程二进制文件。Zorya 框架最初仅支持单线程 TinyGo 二进制,通过将二进制提升到 Ghidra 的 P-Code 中间表示,并利用 Z3 SMT 求解器对具体值和符号值进行推理来检测漏洞。为了支持 gc 编译的二进制,作者解决了三个关键挑战:从 gdb 转储恢复操作系统线程状态以处理多线程;中和运行时抢占机制避免执行干扰;引入写时复制(copy-on-write)覆盖路径分析,用于检测未执行分支上的静默漏洞(如整数溢出)。研究在 11 个来自生产级 Go 项目(如 Kubernetes、Go-Ethereum 和 CoreDNS)的真实漏洞上进行了严格评估。结果表明,Zorya 成功检测出 7 个二进制级别漏洞,其中包括一个静默整数溢出——其他评估工具在没有手动编写预言(oracle)的情况下无法发现。该工作显著扩展了 concolic 测试在 Go 生态系统的实用性,为自动化安全分析提供了新手段。适合安全研究人员、Go 开发者和二进制分析工具开发者阅读。

💡 推荐理由: Zorya 框架的扩展填补了 Go 二进制符号执行研究的空白,能够自动化检测多线程 Go 应用中的安全缺陷,对 K8s、以太坊等关键基础设施的安全性评估具有直接价值。

🎯 建议动作: 研究跟进

排序因子: 来自 arXiv 其他板块 (+2) | Community 数据源 (+1) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.5)
chainguard.dev/apko

apko verifies the signature on `APKINDEX.tar.gz` but never compares individually downloaded `.apk` packages against the checksum recorded in the signed index. The checksum is parsed and available via `ChecksumString()`, and the downloaded package control hash is computed, but the two values are never compared in `getPackageImpl()`. Mismatched packages are silently accepted. An attacker who can sub

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
chainguard.dev/apko

### Impact A crafted `.apk` could install a `TypeSymlink` tar entry whose target pointed outside the build root, and a subsequent directory-creation or file-write entry in the same or later archive could traverse that symlink to reach host paths the build user could write to. The root cause was the `sanitizePath` helper in `pkg/apk/fs/rwosfs.go`, which rejected only lexical `..` traversal and did

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
chainguard.dev/apko

`DiscoverKeys` in `pkg/apk/apk/implementation.go` unconditionally type-asserts JWKS keys as `*rsa.PublicKey` without checking the key type. If a repository JWKS endpoint returns a non-RSA key (e.g. EC), the unchecked assertion panics and crashes apko. This affects any workflow that initializes the APK database and fetches repository keys. Affected versions <= 0.30.34. **Fix:** No fix available ye

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/pelicanplatform/pelican

## Background On April 2nd, 2026, a Claude coding agent alerted Pelican PI Brian Bockelman to a privilege escalation vulnerability affecting Pelican's Web User Interface (WebUI) for various versions between `v7.21` and `v7.24`. Upon further investigation, the Pelican team discovered this attack allows any user authenticated to the WebUI via OAuth to gain admin privileges under certain configurati

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/distribution/distribution/v3, github.com/distribution/distribution

### Summary Tag deletion via the `DELETE /v2//manifests/` endpoint bypasses the `storage.delete.enabled: false` configuration, allowing any API client to remove tags from repositories even when the operator has explicitly disabled deletion. ### Details When `storage.delete.enabled` is configured to false, digest-based manifest deletion is correctly rejected by the guard in [registry/storage/lin

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4

### Summary The workflow executor logs all artifact repository credentials (S3 access keys, secret keys, GCS service account keys, Azure account keys, Git passwords, etc.) in plaintext on artifact operation. Any user with read access to workflow pod logs can extract these credentials. **Note:** This is an incomplete fix of [CVE-2025-62157](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/security/advis

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3, github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4

The fix for CVE-2026-31892 (commit 534f4ff) blocks `podSpecPatch` when `templateReferencing: Strict` is active, but doesn't restrict other WorkflowSpec fields that flow through the same merge path and get applied to pods. A user can set `hostNetwork: true`, override `serviceAccountName`, or change `securityContext` on their Workflow while referencing a hardened template -- these survive `JoinWorkf

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3, github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4

**Severity:** Medium **Component:** Webhook Interceptor (`server/auth/webhook`) **Vulnerability Type:** Denial of Service (DoS) ## Description The Webhook Interceptor loads the entire request body into memory before authenticating the request or verifying its signature. This occurs on the `/api/v1/events/` endpoint, which is publicly accessible (albeit intended for webhooks). An attacker can send

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4

### Summary A nil pointer dereference in `server/auth/gatekeeper.go` `rbacAuthorization()` causes a panic (denial of service) for SSO users whose claims match a namespace-level RBAC rule but not an SSO-namespace rule, when `SSO_DELEGATE_RBAC_TO_NAMESPACE=true`. ### Details When `getServiceAccount(claims, ssoNamespace)` returns nil (no matching rule), the error is suppressed and `loginAccount` rem

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4

### Summary The Sync Service's ConfigMap-backed provider (`server/sync/sync_cm.go`) performs **zero authorization checks** on all CRUD operations (create, read, update, delete). Any authenticated user — including those using fake Bearer tokens — can create, read, update, and delete Kubernetes ConfigMaps containing synchronization limits. ### Details The ConfigMap-backed provider (`server/sync/syn

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 10.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/edgelesssys/contrast

### Impact The [Kata agent policies](https://docs.edgeless.systems/contrast/architecture/components/policies) generated by the Contrast CLI had an issue in the `CopyFile` verification, which allowed arbitrary writes to the guest root filesytem. A malicious process on the host with the capability to connect to the Kata agent VSOCK could connect to the agent and issue a series of `CopyFile` request

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | 影响边界/网络设备 (+5) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/getarcaneapp/arcane/backend

### Summary Four `GET` endpoints under `/api/templates*` in Arcane's Huma backend are registered without any `Security` requirement, allowing any unauthenticated network client to list and read the full Compose YAML and `.env` content of every custom template stored in the instance. Because Arcane's UI exposes a "Save as Template" flow on the project / swarm-stack creation pages that persists the

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/go-pkgz/auth, github.com/go-pkgz/auth/v2

### Summary The Patreon OAuth provider maps every authenticated Patreon account to the same local `user.ID`, instead of deriving a unique ID from the Patreon account returned by Patreon. In practice, this means all Patreon-authenticated users of an application using this library are collapsed into a single local identity. Any application that trusts `token.User.ID` as the stable account key can e

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.1) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/ydb-platform/ydb-go-sdk/v3

### Impact Transactions were NOT committed despite the explicit `options.WithCommit` flag using table service client. Because of this, clients did not commit changes to the transaction, relying on the fact that the transaction commit was successful. This led (in rare cases) to a loss of data consistency. ### Patches `ydb-go-sdk` contains this problem in versions from [v3.104.6](https://github.com

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Vulnerability Details **CWE**: CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation The metadata value sanitization introduced in v8.30.1 (commit 405f106) only validates metadata KEYS via safeKeyPattern regex. Metadata VALUES are passed unsanitized to go-exiftool SetString(), which writes them as fmt.Fprintln(e.stdin, "-"+k+"="+str). A newline (\n) in a value splits the ExifTool stdin line into two separate ar

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (10.0) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

# CVE Report — Unauthenticated SSRF via Unfiltered Webhook URL in Gotenberg ## Severity | Field | Value | |-----------|----------------------------------------| | CVSS v3.1 | **8.6 High** | | Vector | `AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N` | | CWE | CWE-918 — Server-Side Request Forgery | | Auth | None

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8

## Vulnerability Details **CWE**: CWE-918 - Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) The default private-IP deny-lists for --webhook-deny-list and --api-download-from-deny-list use a case-sensitive regex (^https?://). Any uppercase URL scheme variant (HTTP://, HTTPS://, Http://) bypasses the pattern. Go's net/url.Parse() normalizes the scheme to lowercase when making the outbound TCP connection, so th

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: CVSS 严重风险 (9.3) (+4) | 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | 影响关键基础设施/核心组件 (+4) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 5.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/tinfoil-factory/netfoil

### Summary The optional flag `--filter-system-calls` was not applied even if specified. ### Details This is a defense in depth feature to apply additional seccomp filters after the binary has started. The example config also sandboxes the binary with systemd. ### Impact Reduced sandboxing of the netfoil binary.

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 5.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/tinfoil-factory/netfoil

### Summary Rules could be bypassed by changing the first character: `example.com` could be be bypassed by e.g. `fxample.com`. ### Details Off-by-one error in the suffixtrie implementation. ### Impact The domain filter could be bypassed. Please note that DNS filtering alone is not enough to block malicious traffic.

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/coredns/coredns

### Summary The gRPC, QUIC, DoH, and DoH3 transports in CoreDNS incorrectly handle TSIG authentication. For gRPC and QUIC, CoreDNS checks whether the TSIG key name exists in the config, but does not actually verify the TSIG HMAC. If the key name matches, `tsigStatus` remains nil and the tsig plugin treats the request as "verified". For DoH and DoH3, the issue is worse: TSIG is not verified at a

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/coredns/coredns

### Summary CoreDNS' tsig plugin can be bypassed on non-plain-DNS transports because it trusts the transport writer's TsigStatus() instead of performing verification itself. In the attached PoC, plain DNS/TCP correctly rejects an invalid TSIG (NOTAUTH), while the same invalid-TSIG request is accepted over DoT (tls://) and DoH (https://), allowing a client without the shared secret to satisfy requi

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/coredns/coredns

### Summary CoreDNS' transfer plugin can select the wrong ACL stanza when both a parent zone and a more-specific subzone are configured. A permissive parent-zone transfer rule can override a restrictive subzone rule (name-dependent), allowing an unauthorized client to perform AXFR/IXFR for the subzone and retrieve its zone contents. ### Details In plugin/transfer/transfer.go, stanza selection is

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/coredns/coredns

### Summary CoreDNS's DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) GET path accepts oversized `dns=` query values and performs substantial request parsing, query unescaping, base64 decoding, and message unpacking work before returning `400 Bad Request`. A remote, unauthenticated attacker can repeatedly send oversized DoH GET requests to `/dns-query?dns=...` and force high CPU usage, large transient allocations, elevate

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
推荐 7.4
Conf: 50%
github.com/coredns/coredns

### Summary CoreDNS' DNS-over-QUIC (DoQ) server can be driven into large goroutine and memory growth by a remote client that opens many QUIC streams and stalls after sending only 1 byte. Even with a small configured quic { worker_pool_size ... }, CoreDNS still spawns a goroutine per accepted stream (workers + waiters) and active workers can block indefinitely in io.ReadFull() with no per-stream re

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)
github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3

### Summary Fiber cache middleware's default key generator uses only `c.Path()` and does not include the query string. As a result, requests like `/?id=1` and `/?id=2` can map to the same cache key and share the same cached response. This can cause response mix-up (cache poisoning-like behavior) for endpoints where response content depends on query parameters. ### Details Default configuration i

💡 风险点: 原文内容(由于配额限制,未进行深度 LLM 分析)

🎯 建议动作: 建议根据原文自行评估

排序因子: 有可用补丁/修复方案 (+3) | Secondary 数据源 (+2) | 包含 CVE (+2) | LLM 评分加成 (+0.4)