Vulnerabilities exploitable today
355,082in current view
Single score combining CVSS, KEV membership and EPSS. Every CVE with its own record — timeline from publication to active exploitation.
In KEV catalog1,656
New KEV · 24H0
Exploit Today ≥ 701,601
Distribution · last window
- Critical2,577
- High9,224
- Medium7,474
- Low696
Window
Severity
Flags
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.
CVE-2025-1416—6.7%
——2——CVE-2023-7297—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-32229—6.7%
——2——CVE-2024-58251—6.7%
——2——CVE-2022-20595—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-38663—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-452517.8 HIG6.7%
——2A file descriptor can be closed while a thread is blocked in a poll(2) or select(2) call waiting for that descriptor. Because the blocked thread does not hold a reference to the underlying object, this closure may result in the object being freed while the thread remains blocked. In this situation, the kernel must remove the blocked thread from the per-object wait queue prior to freeing the object.
In the case of some file descriptor types, the kernel failed to unlink blocked threads from the object before freeing it. When the blocked thread is subsequently woken, it accesses memory that has already been freed resulting in a use-after-free vulnerability.
The use-after-free vulnerability may be triggered by an unprivileged local user and can be exploited to obtain superuser privileges.11dCVE-2025-49399—6.7%
——2——CVE-2017-18154—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-7683—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-37994—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-68239—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-25835—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-9732—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-540747.8 HIG6.7%
——2Tina is a headless content management system. @tinacms/cli versions prior to 2.4.3 contain a Remote Code Execution vulnerability in the Forestry-to-Tina migration command. The internal helper addVariablesToCode unquotes any value matching the marker "__TINA_INTERNAL__:::(.*?):::" inside the stringified collection JSON. User-supplied label and name fields from .forestry/**/*.yml are placed into that JSON without any sanitisation. An attacker who controls a Forestry-style project can therefore inject arbitrary JavaScript into the generated tina/templates.{ts,js} file. The injected code is written at module top level, so it executes the moment the developer runs tinacms dev or tinacms build, with the developer's privileges. This issue has been fixed in version 2.4.3.32dCVE-2025-55714—6.7%
——2——CVE-2024-31319—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-38664—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-38420—6.7%
——2——CVE-2023-54028—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-35366—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-38612—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-379387.1 HIG6.7%
——2In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tracing: Verify event formats that have "%*p.."
The trace event verifier checks the formats of trace events to make sure
that they do not point at memory that is not in the trace event itself or
in data that will never be freed. If an event references data that was
allocated when the event triggered and that same data is freed before the
event is read, then the kernel can crash by reading freed memory.
The verifier runs at boot up (or module load) and scans the print formats
of the events and checks their arguments to make sure that dereferenced
pointers are safe. If the format uses "%*p.." the verifier will ignore it,
and that could be dangerous. Cover this case as well.
Also add to the sample code a use case of "%*pbl".5dCVE-2026-3386—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-64513—6.7%
——2In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
KVM: x86: Unconditionally recompute CR8 intercept on PPR update
The TPR_THRESHOLD field in the VMCS is used by VMX to induce VM exits
when the guest's virtual TPR falls under the specified threshold,
allowing KVM to inject previously masked interrupts.
KVM handles these VM exits in handle_tpr_below_threshold().
Commit eb90f3417a0c ("KVM: vmx: speed up TPR below threshold vmexits")
optimized this function by calling apic_update_ppr() instead of raising
KVM_REQ_EVENT. apic_update_ppr() then raises KVM_REQ_EVENT if there is
a pending, deliverable interrupt.
However, if there are no new interrupts pending, apic_update_ppr() does
not issue the request. Thus, kvm_lapic_update_cr8_intercept() and
vmx_update_cr8_intercept() are not called before VM entry, which results
in a high, stale TPR_THRESHOLD. This is problematic due to the following
sentence in 28.2.1.1 "VM-Execution Control Fields" in the SDM:
The following check is performed if the “use TPR shadow” VM-execution
control is 1 and the “virtualize APIC accesses” and “virtual-interrupt
delivery” VM-execution controls are both 0: the value of bits 3:0 of
the TPR threshold VM-execution control field should not be greater
than the value of bits 7:4 of VTPR.
This error condition is typically not observed when KVM runs on a bare
metal system because modern processors support APICv, which enables
virtual-interrupt delivery, and which KVM uses when possible. This
causes the processor to no longer generate TPR-below-threshold exits
and to no longer check TPR_THRESHOLD on entry. However, when running
on older platforms, or under nested virtualization on a hypervisor that
does not support virtual-interrupt delivery and enforces this check
(like Hyper-V) this can cause a VM entry failure with hardware error
0x7, as seen in [1].
Call kvm_lapic_update_cr8_intercept() if apic_update_ppr() does not
find a deliverable interrupt (and thus does not raise KVM_REQ_EVENT).
Remove calls to kvm_lapic_update_cr8_intercept() on paths that end up in
apic_update_ppr(), as they now become redundant. This ensures that any
path that updates the guest's PPR also figures out if KVM needs to wait
for a TPR change (using TPR_THRESHOLD on VMX or CR8 intercepts on SVM).10dCVE-2024-49340—6.7%
——2——CVE-2022-20593—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-38569—6.7%
——2——CVE-2020-0210—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-327782.9 LOW6.7%
——2libexpat before 2.7.5 allows a NULL pointer dereference in the function setContext on retry after an earlier ouf-of-memory condition.20dCVE-2025-38696—6.7%
——2——CVE-2017-11007—6.7%
——2——CVE-2024-35953—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-7668—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-54740—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-27257—6.7%
——2——CVE-2024-35892—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-43991—6.7%
——2——CVE-2026-3663—6.7%
——2——CVE-2025-7684—6.7%
——2——