Vulnerabilidades explotables hoy
414,707en 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 KEV1,779
Nuevos KEV · 24H0
Exploit Today ≥ 701,707
Distribución · última ventana
- Crítico5,433
- Alto21,693
- Medio20,021
- Bajo2,091
Filtros
Ventana
Severidad
Filtros
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.
CVE-2018-19239—92.5%
——28——CVE-2011-0249—92.5%
——28——CVE-2012-5351—92.5%
——28——CVE-2007-5693—92.5%
——28——CVE-2021-35323—92.5%
——28——CVE-2003-1111—92.5%
——28——CVE-2008-4058—92.5%
——28——CVE-2011-1218—92.5%
——28——CVE-2008-3543—92.5%
——28——CVE-2021-26822—92.5%
——28——CVE-2007-1628—92.5%
——28——CVE-2006-6864—92.5%
——28——CVE-2023-1390—92.5%
——28——CVE-2016-6987—92.5%
——28——CVE-2007-1878—92.5%
——28——CVE-2018-4932—92.5%
——28——CVE-2018-20836—92.5%
——28——CVE-2023-56785.3 MED92.5%
——28Issue summary: Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking
excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow.
Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to
generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications
that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check()
to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays.
Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from
an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service.
While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817),
DH_check_pub_key() doesn't make any of these checks, and is therefore
vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters.
Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large
P, it doesn't check for an excessively large Q.
An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and
supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be
vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack.
DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of
other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other
functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this
are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate().
Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the
"-pubcheck" option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application.
The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue.
The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.30dCVE-2025-10184—92.5%
——28The vulnerability allows any application installed on the device to read SMS/MMS data and metadata from the system-provided Telephony provider without permission, user interaction, or consent. The user is also not notified that SMS data is being accessed. This could lead to sensitive information disclosure and could effectively break the security provided by SMS-based Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) checks.
The root cause is a combination of missing permissions for write operations in several content providers (com.android.providers.telephony.PushMessageProvider, com.android.providers.telephony.PushShopProvider, com.android.providers.telephony.ServiceNumberProvider), and a blind SQL injection in the update method of those providers.33dCVE-2017-2938—92.5%
——28——CVE-2021-39509—92.5%
——28——CVE-2022-238529.8 CRÍ92.5%
——28Expat (aka libexpat) before 2.4.4 has a signed integer overflow in XML_GetBuffer, for configurations with a nonzero XML_CONTEXT_BYTES.30dCVE-2017-8056—92.5%
——28——CVE-2006-0450—92.5%
——28——CVE-2012-4820—92.5%
——28——CVE-2016-0991—92.5%
——28——CVE-2019-16201—92.5%
——28——CVE-2010-1226—92.5%
——28——CVE-2016-1031—92.5%
——28——CVE-2011-1547—92.5%
——28——CVE-2005-1030—92.5%
——28——CVE-2012-3271—92.5%
——28——CVE-2016-4212—92.5%
——28——CVE-2011-1217—92.5%
——28——CVE-2019-5599—92.5%
——28——CVE-2016-7568—92.5%
——28——CVE-2005-1604—92.5%
——28——CVE-2012-5452—92.5%
——28——CVE-2017-3629—92.5%
——28——CVE-2006-4024—92.5%
——28——