PULSE
FEED
ransomlockbit5 reclama a synergy.co.id · IDransomshiba reclama a Tema Hwt · DEransomqilin reclama a fzmb GmbH, Forschungszentrum für Medizintechnik und Biotechnologie · DE · Healthcareransomqilin reclama a Global Holding · Otherransomwhitearmor reclama a AmplifAI (GoDaddy instance) · US · Technologyransomdirewolf reclama a My Cloud Grocer · GB · Retail & E-Commerceransomhyflock reclama a hitech group · US · Technologyransomqilin reclama a Shibata Co., Ltd. · JP · Manufacturingransomqilin reclama a Meshbesher & Spence · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a BKV Vasúti Jármjavító Kft · HU · Transportationransomqilin reclama a Forum · AT · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a Select Community Management · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a CMD Naturkosmetik · DE · Retail & E-Commerceransomqilin reclama a qc-consult · DE · Professional Servicesransomlockbit5 reclama a synergy.co.id · IDransomshiba reclama a Tema Hwt · DEransomqilin reclama a fzmb GmbH, Forschungszentrum für Medizintechnik und Biotechnologie · DE · Healthcareransomqilin reclama a Global Holding · Otherransomwhitearmor reclama a AmplifAI (GoDaddy instance) · US · Technologyransomdirewolf reclama a My Cloud Grocer · GB · Retail & E-Commerceransomhyflock reclama a hitech group · US · Technologyransomqilin reclama a Shibata Co., Ltd. · JP · Manufacturingransomqilin reclama a Meshbesher & Spence · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a BKV Vasúti Jármjavító Kft · HU · Transportationransomqilin reclama a Forum · AT · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a Select Community Management · US · Professional Servicesransomqilin reclama a CMD Naturkosmetik · DE · Retail & E-Commerceransomqilin reclama a qc-consult · DE · Professional Services
CVE Watch406,313 en archivo total

Vulnerabilidades explotables hoy

406,313en la vista actual

Score único combinando CVSS, membresía KEV y EPSS. Cada CVE con su ficha propia — timeline desde publicación hasta explotación activa.

En catálogo KEV1,766
Nuevos KEV · 24H0
Exploit Today ≥ 701,698

Distribución · última ventana

  • Crítico
    5,562
  • Alto
    21,577
  • Medio
    20,086
  • Bajo
    2,090
Filtros
Filtros

Ventana

Severidad

Filtros

Vulnerabilidades12,561–12,600 · 406,313
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.
CVE-2007-5144—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2012-0017—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2023-36812—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2003-0128—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2018-19753—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2017-14081—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2022-0711—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2018-15140—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2014-4058—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2014-2810—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2018-1333—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2014-4055—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2015-0023—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2017-56647.5 ALT
97.0%
——29The error page mechanism of the Java Servlet Specification requires that, when an error occurs and an error page is configured for the error that occurred, the original request and response are forwarded to the error page. This means that the request is presented to the error page with the original HTTP method. If the error page is a static file, expected behaviour is to serve content of the file as if processing a GET request, regardless of the actual HTTP method. The Default Servlet in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M20, 8.5.0 to 8.5.14, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.43 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.77 did not do this. Depending on the original request this could lead to unexpected and undesirable results for static error pages including, if the DefaultServlet is configured to permit writes, the replacement or removal of the custom error page. Notes for other user provided error pages: (1) Unless explicitly coded otherwise, JSPs ignore the HTTP method. JSPs used as error pages must must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method. (2) By default, the response generated by a Servlet does depend on the HTTP method. Custom Servlets used as error pages must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method.17d
CVE-2024-37732—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2013-6189—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2016-3214—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2009-4019—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2008-1320—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2011-1270—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2012-6649—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2022-35583—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2014-2790—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2017-8757—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2007-3075—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2008-4127—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2005-1193—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2007-6506—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2006-5506—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2006-3911—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2014-2797—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2015-6165—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2007-0656—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2016-4450—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2002-1289—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2010-2862—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2021-22888—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2003-1326—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2016-3290—
97.0%
——29——
CVE-2025-48047—
97.0%
——29——