Vulnerabilities
All
My stack
Known exploited
Public exploit
Critical (9+)
Likely exploited (EPSS ≥ 50%)
Changed, 24 h
New, 24 h
Sort:
risk
modified
published
CVSS
EPSS
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS | Vendor, product | Description | Modified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-83539 | 7.4 high | — | apache software foundation, apache wicket | Improper neutralization of input during web page generation in Apache Wicket. org.apache.wicket.extensions.markup.html.basic.SmartLinkLabel and org.apache.wicket.extensions.markup.html.basic.SmartLinkMultiLineLabel display a text value and turn any URL they find in it into a hyperlink. Both escape the model value and then hand the escaped text to org.apache.wicket.extensions.markup.html.basic.DefaultLinkParser, which searches it for anything of the form scheme://rest and wraps each match in an anchor whose href is the matched text, copied in as it is. The pattern accepts any scheme, and there is no list of permitted schemes anywhere on the path. A text value naming a scheme that executes script therefore becomes an anchor that executes it, in the application's origin and in the reader's own session, when the reader clicks the link. Rendering the page is not enough on its own; the link has to be activated. Escaping does not prevent this and is not the issue: the characters the payload needs are all valid in a URL and are ones that org.apache.wicket.util.string.Strings#escapeMarkup() leaves alone, and the value ends up in a URL rather than in element text, which is a context that escaping model data does not make safe. An application is affected where it renders text it received through either of these two components. That is what they are for: they exist to linkify email addresses and web URLs found in the data an application is displaying, so untrusted input is the purpose of the feature rather than a misuse of it, and no unusual configuration is involved. No other component uses this parser, and an application that uses neither SmartLinkLabel nor SmartLinkMultiLineLabel is not affected. On 9.x and 10.x the Content-Security-Policy Wicket sends by default admits script only from a source carrying a per-response nonce, and a URL whose scheme executes script cannot carry one, so that default policy stops the script from running. This is a property of the default policy and not of these components. An application that has weakened or disabled its Content-Security-Policy, for this or for any unrelated reason, is affected in full. Wicket 8.x has no Content-Security-Policy support at all and is affected as it stands. This issue affects Apache Wicket: from 8.0.0 through 8.19.0, from 9.0.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Users of Apache Wicket 7.x or older, which are no longer supported, should upgrade to a supported version. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue. | 13 h ago |
| CVE-2026-120348 | 6.9 medium | — | dayrui, xunruicms | A vulnerability was identified in dayrui XunRuiCMS up to 4.7.4. Affected by this vulnerability is the function _get_tpl_content of the file dayrui/Fcms/Library/Notice.php of the component Email Template Rendering. The manipulation leads to code injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. | 6 h ago |
| CVE-2026-117635 | unscored | 0.00% | gitea | The `/api/v1/admin` route group did not enforce the `public-only` restriction of personal access tokens. A public-only token with admin scope issued by a site administrator could therefore list private organizations and the email addresses of all users, create organizations, obtain runner registration tokens and create new site administrator accounts, the last of which persists after the token is revoked. Tokens of users who are not site administrators cannot reach these routes; public-only tokens are now rejected on the admin API. | Sun 1 Nov |
| CVE-2026-116474 | unscored | 0.00% | gitea | The `GITEA_TOKEN` of a Gitea Actions job authenticates as the `gitea-actions` system user, and the `/api/v1/user` email and GPG key endpoints accepted that user, so a job could register an email address and a GPG key on it; without required email confirmation (the default) the address is stored as activated. Commit verification treats a key without a real owner as the instance signing key, so any user who can run a workflow job could make commits signed with their own key show as trusted and signed by the instance in every repository where they appear, including pull requests to repositories the user cannot write to. The impact is limited to the displayed signature status: enforcement such as required signed commits only checks that a signature is verified and is unaffected, and no access is gained. The `/api/v1/user` routes now reject system users. | Sun 1 Nov |
| CVE-2026-120263 | unscored | 0.00% | gitea | When `[oauth2_client].ACCOUNT_LINKING` is set to `auto` (not the default) and registration is enabled, the link-account sign-up form looked up the existing account to link by the user name or email submitted in the form instead of the identity asserted by the OAuth2 provider. An attacker with an account on a configured OAuth2 provider could submit another user's name, link their external identity to that Gitea account and be signed in as it without its password, including as an administrator. The link persisted for later sign-ins. Automatic linking now only happens when the existing account matches the provider's email or provider-derived user name; otherwise the account password is required. | Sun 1 Nov |
5 of 5
Download these 5 as CSV · subscribe to this list.
EPSS scores: 2026-11-01. NVD cursor: 2026-10-29 00:22. The News page shows only notable CVEs (KEV, your stack, new criticals, EPSS over 50%, or active exploitation per SSVC); this table has all of them.