CVE-2026-77006
The WebTotem Backups WordPress plugin through 1.0.1 does not validate a user-supplied file path, does not check the capability of the user m
CVSS
9.6
Crítico
EPSS
—
KEV
—
Exploit Today
0
0-100
Publicado: 12 sept 2026 · Última mod.: 12 sept 2026 · CWE-73
Sin historial EPSS suficiente todavía.
The WebTotem Backups WordPress plugin through 1.0.1 does not validate a user-supplied file path, does not check the capability of the user making the request, and discards the result of its own CSRF check, allowing any authenticated user, such as a subscriber, to delete arbitrary files on the server, which can lead to a site takeover.
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.
CVE-2026-770059.6 CRÍ—
——0The CODE MONKEYS PROPOSALS WordPress plugin through 1.0.1 does not validate a user-supplied file path before deleting a file, and does not check the capability of the user making the request, allowing any authenticated user, such as a subscriber, to delete arbitrary files on the server, which can lead to a site takeover.11hCVE-2026-49836—5.1%
——2psd-tools is a Python package for working with Adobe Photoshop PSD files. Prior to version 1.17.1, `SmartObject.save()` writes an embedded smart object to a path taken verbatim from the PSD file. Because that name is attacker-controlled and unsanitised, a tool that extracts embedded objects from an untrusted `.psd` can be made to write attacker-chosen bytes to an attacker-chosen path (absolute or `../`-traversing), outside its intended output directory. A secondary issue in `SmartObject.open()` for external-kind smart objects allows the attacker-controlled `fullPath` descriptor to be used as an arbitrary file read path, enabling exfiltration of the read content to the controlled write destination. Both issues are fixed in v1.17.1.1dCVE-2026-888999.8 CRÍ37.0%
——11knowns versions before 0.31.0 fail to properly validate the x-opencode-directory request header in the /api/opencode proxy endpoint. Remote attackers can supply arbitrary directory paths to execute file operations outside the project root on the host system.1dCVE-2026-539565.4 MED15.2%
——5Rattler is a library that provides common functionality used within the conda ecosystem. `rattler_cache` prior to version 0.9.0 and `py-rattler` prior to version 0.24.0 were vulnerable to package-cache path traversal when handling package metadata from conda channels. During cache materialization, the `ratter_cache` code used the package record `build` string as part of a cache key that was joined into a filesystem path. A malicious or untrusted channel could publish repodata with path separators or traversal components in that field, causing package contents to be written outside the configured package cache directory. The issue requires use of a malicious or otherwise untrusted conda channel. Curated channels that validate package metadata are not expected to allow malformed build strings of this form. Users should upgrade to `rattler_cache` version 0.9.0 or `py-rattler` version 0.24.0 and avoid untrusted conda channels.2dCVE-2026-867518.5 ALT16.0%
——5Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 fails to properly sanitize markdown image syntax in note fields, allowing authenticated users to read arbitrary server files and issue server-side HTTP requests. Attackers can submit markdown image syntax in checkout acceptance notes that survive HTML escaping, are expanded by CommonMark parser, and resolved by laravel-mail-auto-embed via file_get_contents or curl, exfiltrating sensitive files like .env containing APP_KEY.3dCVE-2026-867418.5 ALT14.9%
——4Snipe-IT versions before 8.7.0 fail to sanitize the category EULA text field before rendering it in checkout confirmation emails. Attackers with low-privilege permissions can inject markdown image syntax or raw HTML img tags pointing to local files or remote URLs, which the mail auto-embed library resolves server-side and returns as email attachments, exfiltrating sensitive files like .env credentials and enabling SSRF attacks.3d