← Back
CWE-203

826 CVEs • Abstraction: Base

Observable Discrepancy

The product behaves differently or sends different responses under different circumstances in a way that is observable to an unauthorized actor, which exposes security-relevant information about the state of the product, such as whether a particular operation was successful or not.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (826)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
-
-
Oct 2, 2026
Oct 2, 2026
2.3 LOW· v4
3.1 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
Ghost from 0.7.2 before 6.64.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the Admin API that allows staff-level users to determine the relative ordering of other staff users' password hashes. Authenticated staff...Show more
Ghost from 0.7.2 before 6.64.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the Admin API that allows staff-level users to determine the relative ordering of other staff users' password hashes. Authenticated staff users can query the Admin API to infer hash ordering, though this does not directly reveal hashes or enable practical password recovery.Show less
-
-
Oct 2, 2026
Oct 2, 2026
8.2 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in the CMS RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 key-transport unwrap (KeyTransRecipientInformation.UnwrapKey) in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. bc-csharp before 2.7.0 allows a remote attacker who holds a captured CMS...Show more
Observable discrepancy in the CMS RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 key-transport unwrap (KeyTransRecipientInformation.UnwrapKey) in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. bc-csharp before 2.7.0 allows a remote attacker who holds a captured CMS EnvelopedData message, and who can submit many modified messages to an application that decrypts them with the recipient's RSA private key and reveals how decryption failed, to recover the captured message's content-encryption key and so its content, via a Bleichenbacher-style adaptive chosen-ciphertext attack, because a key-transport ciphertext with invalid PKCS#1 v1.5 padding is rejected during unwrap with a distinct "bad padding in message." CmsException instead of being replaced by a random key, so it can be told apart from a correctly padded ciphertext, which fails only later at content decryption.Show less
-
-
Oct 2, 2026
Oct 2, 2026
8.2 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in IesEngine.DecryptBlock in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. bc-csharp before 2.7.0 allows a remote attacker who has captured an IES or ECIES ciphertext, and who can submit modified ciphertexts fo...Show more
Observable discrepancy in IesEngine.DecryptBlock in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. bc-csharp before 2.7.0 allows a remote attacker who has captured an IES or ECIES ciphertext, and who can submit modified ciphertexts for decryption under the same key pair, to recover its plaintext via a CBC padding-oracle attack, because in block-cipher mode the engine decrypts the ciphertext and removes its padding before verifying the MAC. A padding failure is therefore reported with a different error message, and without the MAC computation, compared with a MAC failure. Only applications that construct IesEngine directly with a padded block cipher, such as AES in CBC mode with PKCS#7 padding, are affected; stream-mode IES is not.Show less
-
-
Oct 7, 2026
Oct 1, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A flaw was found in rubygem-katello. The RegistryProxiesController in Katello contains an authorization bypass vulnerability due to an execution fall-through in the registry_authorize filter. While the application identi...Show more
A flaw was found in rubygem-katello. The RegistryProxiesController in Katello contains an authorization bypass vulnerability due to an execution fall-through in the registry_authorize filter. While the application identifies unauthorized requests and triggers an error response via the unauthorized method, it fails to halt the execution of the current code path (missing return statement). This failure in the control flow allows the application to proceed into subsequent business logic and database validation filters. Consequently, the application reveals its internal state through differential responses, allowing an unprivileged attacker to enumerate valid Users, Organizations, and Products across the entire instance.Show less
-
-
Oct 6, 2026
Oct 1, 2026
5.3 MEDIUM· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Ghost 5.42.2 before 6.58.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the Admin API bulk post and page edit and delete endpoints, which accept filters on restricted fields such as authors.password, because of an...Show more
Ghost 5.42.2 before 6.58.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the Admin API bulk post and page edit and delete endpoints, which accept filters on restricted fields such as authors.password, because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2026-70590. Staff-level attackers can infer other staff users' password hashes from which filters match and perform offline password-guessing attacks against them.Show less
-
-
Oct 1, 2026
Oct 1, 2026
8.7 HIGH· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Ghost versions from 2.10.0 before 6.63.0 contain a staff enumeration vulnerability in the content API that allows unauthenticated attackers to leak user data. Attackers can observe discrepancies in API metadata responses...Show more
Ghost versions from 2.10.0 before 6.63.0 contain a staff enumeration vulnerability in the content API that allows unauthenticated attackers to leak user data. Attackers can observe discrepancies in API metadata responses to enumerate staff members and extract sensitive information without authentication.Show less
-
-
Sep 28, 2026
Sep 25, 2026
6.9 MEDIUM· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
Zammad is a web based open source helpdesk/customer support system. Prior to 7.1.2, the two-factor login step let an attacker try unlimited password guesses for any account without triggering Zammad's normal lockout or r...Show more
Zammad is a web based open source helpdesk/customer support system. Prior to 7.1.2, the two-factor login step let an attacker try unlimited password guesses for any account without triggering Zammad's normal lockout or rate limiting. The response also revealed whether a guess was correct, even before two-factor authentication was checked. This made it possible to brute-force weak or reused passwords. This issue is fixed in version 7.1.2.Show less
-
-
Sep 22, 2026
Sep 22, 2026
2.9 LOW· v4
3.7 LOW· v3
2.6 LOW· v2
A flaw has been found in dgtlmoon changedetection.io up to 0.60.7. The affected element is the function check_password of the file changedetectionio/flask_app.py of the component Hash Comparison. This manipulation of the...Show more
A flaw has been found in dgtlmoon changedetection.io up to 0.60.7. The affected element is the function check_password of the file changedetectionio/flask_app.py of the component Hash Comparison. This manipulation of the argument Password causes observable timing discrepancy. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.Show less
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 17, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in CSS in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.47 allowed a remote attacker to leak sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 17, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in Fonts in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.47 allowed a remote attacker leveraging social engineering to leak sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Android
Sep 21, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
6.2 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
In multiple locations, there is a possible permission bypass due to side channel information disclosure. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction i...Show more
In multiple locations, there is a possible permission bypass due to side channel information disclosure. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Show less
-
-
Sep 18, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
4.2 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A security vulnerability exists in the Sealed Secrets controller's unauthenticated POST endpoints. By submitting a modified payload containing custom Go template logic in spec.template.data, an attacker with internal net...Show more
A security vulnerability exists in the Sealed Secrets controller's unauthenticated POST endpoints. By submitting a modified payload containing custom Go template logic in spec.template.data, an attacker with internal network access can abuse the handler as a decryption oracle to recover the full plaintext of any sealed secret. The POST /v1/verify and /v1/rotate handlers call Unseal() to decrypt target secrets, then render any Go templates found in spec.template.data.* using the decrypted payload as the evaluation context (pkg/apis/sealedsecrets/v1alpha1/sealedsecret_expansion.go). Errors encountered during template execution are directly reflected in the resulting HTTP response status codes. Missing AEAD label binding: the spec.template.data field is omitted from the AEAD authenticated-data label binding ciphertext to metadata. As a result, an attacker can copy a target's valid metadata and encryptedData verbatim, satisfying AEAD decryption and label validation, while freely replacing spec.template.data with arbitrary template logic. Side-channel oracle: template execution errors map directly to HTTP response codes. HTTP 200 (OK) indicates template execution succeeded; HTTP 409 (Conflict) indicates template execution failed (e.g. via {{ fail "..." }}). By injecting conditional statements such as {{ if eq (substr 0 1 .password) "S" }}ok{{ else }}{{ fail "x" }}{{ end }}, an attacker receives an HTTP 200 status when a character guess is correct and an HTTP 409 when it is incorrect. This differential response leaks one character-equality bit per request, allowing full secret extraction over successive queries. Attack vector & prerequisites: unauthenticated; requires network access to the controller's internal service port (:8080). Although this service is not exposed to the public internet by default, it is accessible to any pod within the Kubernetes cluster or via a kubectl port-forward connection.Show less
-
-
Sep 18, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The self-registration flow accepts user-supplied input for usernames without adequately preventing the disclosure of username existence. When a user attempts to register with an existing username, the system responds wit...Show more
The self-registration flow accepts user-supplied input for usernames without adequately preventing the disclosure of username existence. When a user attempts to register with an existing username, the system responds with an error message that explicitly indicates the username is already in use. This behavior allows an attacker to discover valid usernames within the system. The discovery of valid usernames can facilitate subsequent attacks such as brute force, social engineering, and targeted phishing campaigns.Show less
-
-
Oct 14, 2026
Sep 15, 2026
N/A· v4
3.7 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
The SMS OTP flow fails to adequately handle error messages, allowing an attacker to infer the existence of registered user accounts based on the responses received during the OTP initiation process. This weakness can be...Show more
The SMS OTP flow fails to adequately handle error messages, allowing an attacker to infer the existence of registered user accounts based on the responses received during the OTP initiation process. This weakness can be exploited by an attacker to discover valid usernames within the system. The impact is amplified for accounts that have not configured a mobile number, as the enumeration is specifically tied to this condition. The discovery of these usernames can facilitate subsequent brute force attacks, social engineering attempts, and information leakage, potentially leading to reputational damage, loss of customer trust, and regulatory non-compliance.Show less
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 9, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in DOM in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker leveraging social engineering to obtain sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 9, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in SVG in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 9, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in Prefetch in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 9, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in Layout in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker to leak sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 10, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
3.1 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in Network in Google Chrome prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker to obtain cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Sep 9, 2026
Sep 9, 2026
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Observable discrepancy in Safebrowsing in Google Chrome on on iOS prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially obtain sensitive information via a crafted HTML p...Show more
Observable discrepancy in Safebrowsing in Google Chrome on on iOS prior to 153.0.8010.36 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially obtain sensitive information via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)Show less