CVE-2026-53789
rsync before 3.5.0 contains an improper path handling vulnerability that allows a malicious sender to expand the scope of --delete operation
CVSS
6.5
Medium
EPSS
0.3%
p23
KEV
—
Exploit Today
7
0-100
Published: Aug 13, 2026 · Last modified: Aug 26, 2026 · CWE-807
0.3%EPSS · 30 days0.3%
2026-08-142026-08-26
rsync before 3.5.0 contains an improper path handling vulnerability that allows a malicious sender to expand the scope of --delete operations beyond the intended destination subtree by sending a crafted file list that causes rsync to reclassify implied parent directory entries or treat synthetic paths as the transfer root. Attackers can exploit multiple variants including implied parent reclassification, synthetic root path construction, legacy protocol behavior below version 30, and non-directory root handling to cause the receiver to delete files outside the authorized destination directory.
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.
CVE-2026-630418.8 HIG—
———Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision vulnerability in Apache APISIX.
This vulnerability allows an attacker to escalate privilege or perform an authorization bypass by sending certain values that the attach-consumer-label plugin does not sanitise correctly.
This issue affects Apache APISIX: from 3.11.0 through 3.17.0.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 3.18.0, which fixes the issue.6hCVE-2026-54730—30.2%
——9authentik is an open-source identity provider. Prior to 2026.2.6 and 2026.5.5, the enterprise Google Chrome device-trust stages advance the flow without confirming that the out-of-band device attestation actually ran. Affected enterprise deployments place either a Google Chrome Endpoint stage with mode set to REQUIRED or the deprecated Google Chrome Device Trust Connector stage in an authentication flow. The device attestation occurs in a verification iframe that calls the Google Verified Access API and records the verified device on success, but the vulnerable stages treat the flow as passed as soon as the stage is submitted. An attacker who can reach such a stage, including after primary username and password authentication, can skip the verification iframe and authenticate from a device that was never verified. Where device trust is the only additional factor, that protection is fully bypassed, while other configured factors remain in force. This issue is fixed in versions 2026.2.6 and 2026.5.5.9dCVE-2026-649344.3 MED10.9%
——3The Mira cloud API accepts the firmware version reported by the companion app as authoritative for a given device, without independently attesting the version from the device itself. An authenticated attacker could submit arbitrary firmware version strings for their own device, allowing them to evade vendor-side vulnerable-fleet analytics, suppress security update prompts to the user, and misrepresent patch-adoption metrics.15dCVE-2026-195795.4 MED19.9%
——6Snipe-IT before 8.6.0 contains an authorization bypass (insecure direct object reference) in the asset checkout-request cancellation endpoint. The cancel_by_admin and requestingUser values are read from user-controlled URL path segments and used without a server-side authorization check, so any authenticated, low-privileged user can supply a non-empty cancel_by_admin value to bypass the request-ownership check and cancel another user's pending checkout request. Because asset and user identifiers are sequential integers, an attacker can enumerate them to cancel every pending checkout request, disrupting the asset-request workflow. This is fixed in Snipe-IT 8.6.0.6dCVE-2026-187056.5 MED18.8%
——6An issue in MongoDB Server's Atlas Vector Search feature could allow an authenticated user with read access to one view to retrieve documents from a different, protected view over the same underlying collection. This is due to insufficient handling of certain user-supplied fields when constructing an internal request forwarded to the search process.16dCVE-2026-582393.7 LOW12.3%
——4SAP Approuter does not sufficiently validate tenant context in inbound requests. An unauthenticated attacker could send specially crafted requests to spoof the tenant context under conditions not fully within their control. Successful exploitation could allow limited access to another tenant's information, resulting in a low impact on confidentiality. There is no impact on integrity and availability.1d