| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper authorization. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service due to uncontrolled resource consumption during ZIP file extraction. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an incomplete blocklist in the code security scanner. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a path traversal vulnerability. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper input validation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary OS commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command ('Code Injection'), aka improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in code, resulting in a sandbox escape. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper input validation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command ('Code Injection') related to improper input validation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information or inject malicious data due to improper access control in the vertex result caching subsystem. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow an attacker with access to the server secret and Redis write access to submit a malicious serialized cache value. When the value was retrieved, deserialization could have executed attacker-controlled code with the privileges of the service process. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper authentication and missing authorization. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a buffer overflow. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to read arbitrary files due to improper path canonicalization. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to the improper use of reflection with externally controlled input. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary JavaScript in an authenticated user's browser due to improper neutralization of HTML input. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to perform unauthorized payment mutation actions due to missing authorization. |
