← Back
CWE-358

138 CVEs • Abstraction: Base

Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard

The product does not implement or incorrectly implements one or more security-relevant checks as specified by the design of a standardized algorithm, protocol, or technique.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (138)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
1Microsoft
1Powershell
Oct 22, 2026
Oct 13, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Improperly implemented security check for standard in Microsoft PowerShell allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.
1Microsoft
14Windows 10 1607
Windows 10 1809Windows 10 21h2+11 more
Oct 16, 2026
Oct 13, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Improperly implemented security check for standard in Windows PowerShell allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.
-
-
Oct 22, 2026
Oct 13, 2026
N/A· v4
8.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Improperly implemented security check for standard in .NET allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
-
-
Oct 1, 2026
Sep 28, 2026
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Authlib (v1.7.2 and below) contains a signature verification bypass vulnerability. The JsonWebSignature.deserialize_json() method accepts a JSON Serialization JWS object and returns the payload as successfully verified w...Show more
Authlib (v1.7.2 and below) contains a signature verification bypass vulnerability. The JsonWebSignature.deserialize_json() method accepts a JSON Serialization JWS object and returns the payload as successfully verified without checking for a signature and without requiring a cryptographic key.Show less
1Nlnetlabs
1Unbound
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 22, 2026
N/A· v4
3.7 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
In NLnet Labs Unbound 1.6.0 up to and including 1.25.1, a replay of a wildcard rrset as another piece of data, could be briefly considered DNSSEC secure based only on the RRSIG validation and stored into cache, before la...Show more
In NLnet Labs Unbound 1.6.0 up to and including 1.25.1, a replay of a wildcard rrset as another piece of data, could be briefly considered DNSSEC secure based only on the RRSIG validation and stored into cache, before later validation treats it as bogus based on NSEC validation. When the resolving thread puts secure on the rrset, and another thread that is on the serve expired path then picks up the updated rrset contents with the secure status for a reply, it can be used to change a specific record, next to a wildcard that could be covered by the wildcard, into the wildcard. A malicious actor can exploit the possible poisonous effect by having any DNSSEC-singed domain (irrelevant to the victim domain) and a CNAME wrapper record that points to a record next to a wildcard (that could be covered by the wildcard). Then quering Unbound for the wildcard sibling record would seed the secure message. A later (after expiry) query for the CNAME wrapper would need to resolve the target sibling record. If the wildcard replay is injected into the response, the wildcard rrset will update the expired sibling record with a secure status before completing proper wildcard validation with NSEC records and eventually treating the CNAME wrapper answer as bogus. The updated poisoned rrset is now secure and points to the wildcard. This vulnerability is explicit for the serve expired path and needs injection of the signed wildcard rrset without the NSEC accompanying rrset.Show less
-
-
Jul 30, 2026
Jul 21, 2026
5.9 MEDIUM· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Trezor Safe 3, Safe 5, and Safe 7 firmware contains a confirmation-binding flaw in the Ethereum sign_tx / sign_tx_eip1559 flow. For contract interactions, the device confirms only the initial calldata chunk while the sig...Show more
Trezor Safe 3, Safe 5, and Safe 7 firmware contains a confirmation-binding flaw in the Ethereum sign_tx / sign_tx_eip1559 flow. For contract interactions, the device confirms only the initial calldata chunk while the signature commits to the full streamed calldata. An attacker could present calldata to a victim then supply a different tail that changes the signed transaction. Fixed in 70c9b0c.Show less
1Microsoft
11Windows 10 1607
Windows 10 1809Windows 10 21h2+8 more
Jul 22, 2026
Jul 14, 2026
N/A· v4
7.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Improperly implemented security check for standard in Windows Secure Boot allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally.
-
-
Jul 2, 2026
Jul 2, 2026
5.1 MEDIUM· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
In liboauth2 the Demonstrating Proof-of-Possession (DPoP) verifier accepts a proof whose JSON Web Key (jwk) header contains private key material. RFC 9449 section 4.3 step 7 requires the verifier to reject such a proof b...Show more
In liboauth2 the Demonstrating Proof-of-Possession (DPoP) verifier accepts a proof whose JSON Web Key (jwk) header contains private key material. RFC 9449 section 4.3 step 7 requires the verifier to reject such a proof but oauth2_token_verify() function returns success for a malformed DPoP proof that embeds the private Elliptic Curve (EC) key in the header. This issue was fixed in version 2.3.0Show less
-
-
Jul 2, 2026
Jul 1, 2026
7.6 HIGH· v4
6.8 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Description: To issue and renew TLS certificates on behalf of customers, Cloudflare's Universal SSL feature automatically manages the CAA RRset for the customer's zone. This auto-managed RRset is permissive by design...Show more
Description: To issue and renew TLS certificates on behalf of customers, Cloudflare's Universal SSL feature automatically manages the CAA RRset for the customer's zone. This auto-managed RRset is permissive by design (e.g. 'issue "letsencrypt.org"' without parameters). On Universal SSL zones, Cloudflare's authoritative DNS serves this auto-managed RRset at query time, superseding any customer-configured CAA records on the zone. When a customer publishes a stricter CAA record using the RFC 8657 accounturi or validationmethods parameters, the Certificate Authority does not observe those parameters when evaluating the served RRset under RFC 8659. As a result, the RFC 8657 account-binding and validation-method-binding protections are not enforced end-to-end on Universal SSL zones. Successful exploitation could result in issuance of a browser-trusted TLS certificate to an attacker, enabling MITM against the affected domain. Exploitation is non-trivial in practice: an attacker would need to hold an ACME account at one of the Certificate Authorities in the served CAA RRset and to simultaneously satisfy domain control validation across the multiple geographically distinct Network Perspectives the CA relies on for Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration. Cloudflare prefixes are anycast-announced from hundreds of locations globally, raising the bar against single-vantage-point BGP hijacks. Any resulting misissuance of a browser-trusted certificate is subject to Certificate Transparency logging required by major browsers, and would be visible to CT monitoring. Mitigation:  Customers requiring strict RFC 8657 enforcement need to disable Universal SSL on the affected zone. Universal SSL's automatic CAA management and customer-set RFC 8657 accounturi and validationmethods enforcement are mutually exclusive by the nature of the issue, so there is no in-product workaround that preserves both.  Certificate Transparency monitoring is recommended for all customers as a general detection control. Credits: David Osipov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-2713-9242), independent researcherShow less
-
-
Jul 1, 2026
Jul 1, 2026
8.7 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
DVP80ES3 with Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard vulnerability.
-
-
Aug 3, 2026
Jun 26, 2026
N/A· v4
7.3 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
It is possible to bypass the Kerberos pre-authentication check in Apache Kerby by sending a PA-DATA with an unrecognized or unsupported type. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.1.2, which fixes this issue.
-
-
Jun 18, 2026
Jun 17, 2026
9.3 CRITICAL· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
Backpropagate is a Python library for fine-tuning large language models on a single GPU. In versions 1.1.0 and 1.1.1, the optional Reflex web UI exposes a training control plane without authentication: dataset upload, mo...Show more
Backpropagate is a Python library for fine-tuning large language models on a single GPU. In versions 1.1.0 and 1.1.1, the optional Reflex web UI exposes a training control plane without authentication: dataset upload, model load, training start/stop, multi-run orchestration, GGUF export, and HuggingFace Hub push. The CLI accepts two operator-facing flags intended as security controls: --auth user:pass — documented as "require HTTP Basic authentication on every request to the UI." and--share — documented as "expose the UI on a public address; requires --auth." When --auth user:pass is passed, the CLI prints Auth: enabled (user: <username>) to confirm to the operator that authentication is active, then exports BACKPROPAGATE_UI_AUTH=user:pass to the subprocess that launches the Reflex backend. The Reflex backend (backpropagate/ui_app/**) never reads BACKPROPAGATE_UI_AUTH. No authentication middleware is registered. No request-level guard runs. No WebSocket upgrade guard runs. Any client that reaches the bound port — local or remote, depending on whether --share is used — has full UI access. An inline comment at backpropagate/cli.py:1217-1218 in the v1.1.0 source documents the gap: "For Phase 1 the variable is exported but Reflex doesn't read it yet." This comment was internal-facing; the user-facing documentation (README, CHANGELOG, SHIP_GATE) advertised the contract as enforced. An attacker who reaches the bound port can read uploaded datasets, trigger arbitrary training runs against any local base models as well as read their paths, trigger HuggingFace Hub pushes and cause disk-fill DoS. This issue has been fixed in version 1.2.0. If developers cannot immediately upgrade to 1.2.0 run backprop ui with no flags so it binds to localhost, use SSH port-forwarding (ssh -L 7860:localhost:7860 <training-host>) instead of --share for remote access, and audit any host previously launched with --share, re-issuing any HF tokens used during those sessions.Show less
1Apache
1Cxf
Aug 7, 2026
Jun 12, 2026
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
A logic error in OAuthRequestFilter rejects legitimate requests originating from the bound IP address, while blindly allowing requests from any other IP address. Enabling this security feature inadvertently creates an i...Show more
A logic error in OAuthRequestFilter rejects legitimate requests originating from the bound IP address, while blindly allowing requests from any other IP address. Enabling this security feature inadvertently creates an inverse security check. Users are recommended to upgrade to versions 4.2.2 or 4.1.7 or 3.6.12, which fixes this issue.Show less
1Google
1Chrome
Jul 23, 2026
Jun 4, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Inappropriate implementation in WebAPKs in Google Chrome on Android prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted WebAPK. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Jul 23, 2026
Jun 4, 2026
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Inappropriate implementation in Keyboard in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to inject arbitrary scripts or HTML (UXSS) via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, Ella Core does not verify the UE Security Capabilities received in NGAP PathSwitchRequest messages against its locally stored values. A malicious gNB...Show more
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, Ella Core does not verify the UE Security Capabilities received in NGAP PathSwitchRequest messages against its locally stored values. A malicious gNB can overwrite Ella Core's stored UE security capabilities for any UE with arbitrary values by sending a single crafted PathSwitchRequest. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.0.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
3.7 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, Ella Core didn't enforce security rules on concurrent running of security procedures defined in TS 33.501 §6.9.5.1 — it could send a NAS Security Mod...Show more
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, Ella Core didn't enforce security rules on concurrent running of security procedures defined in TS 33.501 §6.9.5.1 — it could send a NAS Security Mode Command while an N2 handover was still pending (and vice versa). Concurrent Security Mode Command and N2 handover produce a KgNB mismatch between the UE and target gNB, causing the handover to fail. Requires a stalled gNB + re-registration race to trigger. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.0.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
7.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, a radio with a valid NG Setup can send a forged PDUSessionResourceSetupResponse carrying any UE's AMF-UE-NGAP-ID. Ella Core does not verify the messa...Show more
Ella Core is a 5G core designed for private networks. Prior to 1.10.0, a radio with a valid NG Setup can send a forged PDUSessionResourceSetupResponse carrying any UE's AMF-UE-NGAP-ID. Ella Core does not verify the message arrived on the SCTP association bound to that UE's logical NG-connection, then creates a GTP tunnel towards that radio. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.0.Show less
1Free5gc
1Free5gc
Oct 14, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
5.4 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
free5GC is an open-source implementation of the 5G core network. Prior to 4.2.2, the AMF in Free5GC does not enforce the concurrent security procedure rules defined in 3GPP TS 33.501 §6.9.5.1. The AMF does not check for...Show more
free5GC is an open-source implementation of the 5G core network. Prior to 4.2.2, the AMF in Free5GC does not enforce the concurrent security procedure rules defined in 3GPP TS 33.501 §6.9.5.1. The AMF does not check for ongoing N2 handover procedures before initiating a NAS Security Mode Command, and vice versa. This can lead to mismatches between NAS and AS security contexts in the network and the UE. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.2.2.Show less
1Free5gc
1Free5gc
Oct 14, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
7.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
free5GC is an open-source implementation of the 5G core network. Prior to 4.2.2, the AMF in Free5GC does not verify the UE Security Capabilities received in NGAP PathSwitchRequest messages against its locally stored valu...Show more
free5GC is an open-source implementation of the 5G core network. Prior to 4.2.2, the AMF in Free5GC does not verify the UE Security Capabilities received in NGAP PathSwitchRequest messages against its locally stored values, as mandated by 3GPP TS 33.501 §6.7.3.1. A malicious gNB can overwrite the AMF's stored UE security capabilities with arbitrary values, which are then propagated in PathSwitchRequest Acknowledge messages and subsequent Handover Request messages. This leads to persistent handover denial-of-service for affected UEs. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.2.2.Show less