Vulnerabilities exploitable today
379,124in current view
Single score combining CVSS, KEV membership and EPSS. Every CVE with its own record — timeline from publication to active exploitation.
In KEV catalog1,721
New KEV · 24H0
Exploit Today ≥ 701,654
Distribution · last window
- Critical2,385
- High8,590
- Medium7,035
- Low793
Filters
Window
Severity
Flags
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.
CVE-2026-23583——
——0Rejected reason: Withdrawn by requester.22dCVE-2020-37264——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected.43dCVE-2026-17519——
——0Rejected reason: This is rejected.44dCVE-2026-51236——
——0Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CVE RECORD. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This record was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.54dCVE-2026-51234——
——0Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CVE RECORD. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This record was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.54dCVE-2026-198546.1 MED0.0%
——0When the ClickHouse plugin uses Native protocol (the default) with PDC or secure SOCKS, it asks for TLS but the connection library ignores that and talks to ClickHouse in the clear. Username, password, queries, and results can be read on the hop after the proxy. The server certificate is never checked, and a configured client certificate is not sent.23dCVE-2026-76161——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.18dCVE-2023-32640——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2025-36916—0.0%
——0——CVE-2023-41370——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2023-28719——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2026-64841——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.24dCVE-2023-45848——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2026-9052——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.33dCVE-2026-85789——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.7dCVE-2023-36852——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2023-54371——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected.43dCVE-2026-69125——
——0Rejected reason: ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2026-67321. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2026-67321. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2026-67321 instead of this candidate.48dCVE-2023-49720——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2021-48002——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected.27dCVE-2026-51285——
——0Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CVE RECORD. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This record was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.54dCVE-2026-28534——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.44dCVE-2026-35027——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.44dCVE-2026-51249——
——0Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CVE RECORD. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This record was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.54dCVE-2023-42432——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2025-2795——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.33dCVE-2026-14286——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.75dCVE-2026-10772——
——0Rejected reason: ** DUPLICATE ** This CVE Record has been rejected by the Zephyr Project CNA. CVE-2026-10772 was assigned to a vulnerability already covered by CVE-2026-2411, which was assigned earlier for the same defect: the Bluetooth GATT notify/indicate paths check the permissions of the Characteristic Declaration attribute rather than the Characteristic Value attribute, so the encryption/authentication requirements configured on the value are not enforced. Both identifiers describe the same root cause in subsys/bluetooth/host/gatt.c, fixed by the same commit (c3386f92fe81bd10dc23e6a115e6a80a7d863546). Use CVE-2026-2411 instead.53dCVE-2026-28184——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.41dCVE-2026-240907.1 HIG0.0%
——0Cryptographic issue while processing partition table entries allows unauthorized modification of boot flow.63dCVE-2023-27299——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2026-285907.8 HIG0.0%
——0In multiple locations, there is a possible improper encryption key validation due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.8dCVE-2023-49116——
——0Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority because it is Unused27dCVE-2026-51253——
——0Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CVE RECORD. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This record was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.54dCVE-2026-967559.8 CRI—
——0orval versions 8.14.0 through 8.28.1 contain a code injection vulnerability in the @orval/effect generator that converts OpenAPI schema defaults into template literals. Attackers can inject arbitrary JavaScript expressions via schema defaults containing ${...} syntax, which are executed at module scope when the generated code is built or imported.3hCVE-2026-967758.8 HIG—
——0MLflow's dspy flavor, versions >= 2.0, applies the MLFLOW_ALLOW_PICKLE_DESERIALIZATION=False security control only when the model_path ends in .pkl, which allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via a crafted MLmodel artifact.3hCVE-2023-21178—0.0%
——0——CVE-2026-968048.8 HIG—
——0MLflow's statsmodel flavor, versions 2.1.0 to 3.14.0, omits the MLFLOW_ALLOW_PICKLE_DESERIALIZATION=False security control entirely in _load_model(), which allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via a crafted MLmodel artifact.4hCVE-2026-714614.3 MED—
——0HostList.list() catches bare Exception and returns str(e)
verbatim. Via host_filter, any authenticated user triggers
Django FieldError (leaking complete Host model relation
graph including internal reverse accessors) or PostgreSQL
DataError (leaking raw database error strings). Two
primitives: credential__search=x dumps ORM schema,
name__regex=[bad reflects PostgreSQL errors.2hCVE-2026-760897.7 HIG—
——0Formie is a Craft CMS plugin for creating forms. Prior to 2.2.23 and 3.1.31, Formie's formie/sent-notifications/get-resend-modal-content control panel action in SentNotificationsController::actionGetResendModalContent accepts a request-supplied notification ID without permission or object-level authorization checks. Any authenticated user able to invoke the action can enumerate notification IDs and read recipient headers and complete HTML email bodies containing submitted form data, even without the sent-notification viewing permission. This issue is fixed in versions 2.2.23 and 3.1.31.2h