PULSE
ES
FEED
ransombooba project reclama a COASTAL CAROLINA NEUROPSYCHIATRIC CENTER, PA · US · Healthcareransomn0n reclama a Company #98 · ET · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #97 · TN · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #96 · TT · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #95 · CH · Not Foundransomanubis reclama a Fisher59 · Not Foundransompayload reclama a BW Office World · Retail & E-Commerceransompayload reclama a Brüninghoff Group · DE · Manufacturingransomglobal secret group reclama a Rosenberg & Pittinsky · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a Toyota Canarias · ES · Transportationransomlockbit5 reclama a chooseultimate.com · US · Retail & E-Commerceransomredact reclama a Baker Donelson · US · Professional Servicesransomn0n reclama a Vormittag Associates Inc · US · Not Foundransomglobal secret group reclama a Seminole Schools · US · Educationransombooba project reclama a COASTAL CAROLINA NEUROPSYCHIATRIC CENTER, PA · US · Healthcareransomn0n reclama a Company #98 · ET · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #97 · TN · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #96 · TT · Not Foundransomn0n reclama a Company #95 · CH · Not Foundransomanubis reclama a Fisher59 · Not Foundransompayload reclama a BW Office World · Retail & E-Commerceransompayload reclama a Brüninghoff Group · DE · Manufacturingransomglobal secret group reclama a Rosenberg & Pittinsky · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a Toyota Canarias · ES · Transportationransomlockbit5 reclama a chooseultimate.com · US · Retail & E-Commerceransomredact reclama a Baker Donelson · US · Professional Servicesransomn0n reclama a Vormittag Associates Inc · US · Not Foundransomglobal secret group reclama a Seminole Schools · US · Education
CVE Watch399,240 in full archive

Vulnerabilities exploitable today

14,875in current view

Single score combining CVSS, KEV membership and EPSS. Every CVE with its own record — timeline from publication to active exploitation.

In KEV catalog1,748
New KEV · 24H0
Exploit Today ≥ 701,665

Distribution · last window

  • Critical
    3,347
  • High
    15,203
  • Medium
    14,178
  • Low
    1,360
Filters
Filters

Window

Severity

Flags

Vulnerabilities14,121–14,160 · 14,875
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.
CVE-2026-181639.8 CRI
42.6%
——13IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper deserialization of untrusted data.14dCVE-2026-181629.8 CRI
39.9%
——12IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of user-controlled input within the new Function constructor.14dCVE-2026-958197.3 HIG
33.9%
——10A vulnerability has been found in anirbandutta9 College-Notes-Gallery up to 8c1cf3d98f30982d069c88ca172612c001eb39f6. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file login.php. Such manipulation of the argument user/pass leads to sql injection. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product utilizes a rolling release system for continuous delivery, and as such, version information for affected or updated releases is not disclosed. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.27dCVE-2026-19202—
15.3%
——5A caching flaw in the toolbox-core package of the mcp-toolbox-sdk-python SDK causes the same Google ID token to be cached and reused across different audiences. If an application uses the SDK to authenticate to two or more different audiences within the same process, the module-level token cache fails to key its cached tokens by the requested audience. Consequently, a valid, unexpired token minted for a sensitive service (Service A) can be retrieved from the cache and sent to a secondary service (Service B). An attacker who operates, compromises, or monitors traffic to Service B can capture this token and replay it to impersonate the victim application against Service A.27dCVE-2026-181614.3 MED
10.1%
——3IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to falsify transaction audit logs due to improper validation of a client-supplied HTTP header.14dCVE-2026-181566.5 MED
12.1%
——4IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to bypass security controls by forging user identities due to improper authorization.12dCVE-2026-181548.0 HIG
16.3%
——5IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to the use of a hard-coded or predictable cryptographic key.12dCVE-2026-181535.4 MED
3.8%
——1IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information and forge authentication tags due to the use of hard-coded cryptographic keys and initialization vectors.12dCVE-2026-181527.4 HIG
7.4%
——2IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to forge validly-signed messages due to improper verification of cryptographic signatures.12dCVE-2026-181378.1 HIG
20.9%
——6IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary ESQL commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an ESQL command.27dCVE-2026-181347.5 HIG
8.8%
——3IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.13dCVE-2026-181335.4 MED
21.1%
——6IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to modify server files due to path traversal.13dCVE-2026-181326.5 MED
10.9%
——3IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to perform unauthorized payment mutation actions due to missing authorization.13dCVE-2026-181318.2 HIG
11.3%
——3IBM 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.13dCVE-2026-181246.5 MED
0.6%
——0IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials.13dCVE-2026-181237.6 HIG
16.6%
——5IBM 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.13dCVE-2026-181146.5 MED
36.4%
——11IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to read arbitrary files due to improper path canonicalization.13dCVE-2026-180958.5 HIG
37.0%
——11IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a buffer overflow.13dCVE-2026-180748.2 HIG
28.1%
——8IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper authentication and missing authorization.13dCVE-2026-180667.9 HIG
0.6%
——0IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information and trigger unauthorized actions due to server-side request forgery.12dCVE-2026-176478.8 HIG
11.5%
——3IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to the inclusion of functionality from an untrusted control sphere.12dCVE-2026-176468.5 HIG
20.5%
——6IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper restriction of XML external entity references.12dCVE-2026-176459.1 CRI
26.7%
——8IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to gain elevated privileges due to improper privilege management.12dCVE-2026-176448.8 HIG
0.8%
——0IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information and modify transaction data due to the use of hard-coded credentials.12dCVE-2026-176438.8 HIG
0.9%
——0IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information and perform unauthorized actions due to insufficiently protected credentials.12dCVE-2026-176378.8 HIG
14.5%
——4IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow an adjacent-network attacker to execute arbitrary code due to deserialization of untrusted data.12dCVE-2026-176368.8 HIG
42.4%
——13IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper validation of a specified quantity.12dCVE-2026-176359.1 CRI
27.1%
——8IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper configuration of HTTP method-based security constraints.12dCVE-2026-176205.3 MED
10.3%
——3IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift 4.0.6.0 through 4.0.6.0.0.6.0 Refresh (Operator 4.4.6+20260807.081800)4.0.7.04.0.8.04.0.9.04.0.10.0 Interim Fix 064 IBM Financial Transaction Manager transmits sensitive or security-critical data in cleartext in a communication channel that can be sniffed by unauthorized actors.5dCVE-2026-176187.3 HIG
14.8%
——4IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to view and modify sensitive information and cause a denial of service due to improper authorization.5dCVE-2026-174729.6 CRI
21.5%
——6IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 3.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to access or modify unauthorized resources due to the use of wildcards in RBAC permission definitions.27dCVE-2026-174656.5 MED
19.2%
——6IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 3.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service due to improper enforcement of storage limits.27dCVE-2026-171028.8 HIG
46.4%
——14IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command.25dCVE-2026-166728.8 HIG
45.1%
——14IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command.25dCVE-2026-164698.8 HIG
61.0%
——18IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 px-runtime could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command.25dCVE-2026-164688.8 HIG
77.0%
——23IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to OS command injection.25dCVE-2026-164266.5 MED
8.5%
——3IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 3.0.0 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks.27dCVE-2026-163469.9 CRI
38.0%
——11IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command.14dCVE-2026-159156.2 MED
1.9%
——1IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 3.0.0 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to recursive copying of build context directories into container images.27dCVE-2025-360845.9 MED
5.0%
——2IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 3.0.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information.6d