← Back
CWE-693

627 CVEs • Abstraction: Pillar

Protection Mechanism Failure

The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (627)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
1Intel
1Computing Improvement Program
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 11, 2025
5.4 MEDIUM· v4
6.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) CIP software before version WIN_DCA_2.4.0.11001 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user...Show more
Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) CIP software before version WIN_DCA_2.4.0.11001 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. Unprivileged software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts.Show less
1Intel
1Computing Improvement Program
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 11, 2025
6.0 MEDIUM· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) CIP software before version WIN_DCA_2.4.0.11001 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an information disclosure. Unprivileged software adversary with an unauthenticated...Show more
Protection mechanism failure for some Intel(R) CIP software before version WIN_DCA_2.4.0.11001 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an information disclosure. Unprivileged software adversary with an unauthenticated user combined with a low complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via adjacent access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 11, 2025
N/A· v4
4.4 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Collision in MiniFilter driver in Avast Software Avast Free Antivirus  before 25.9  on Windows allows a local attacker with administrative privileges to disable real-time protection and self-defense mechanisms.
1Google
1Chrome
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 8, 2025
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Insufficient policy enforcement in Devtools in Google Chrome prior to 140.0.7339.80 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via Devtools. (Chromium security severity: Low)
1Google
1Chrome
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 8, 2025
N/A· v4
5.4 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Inappropriate implementation in Permissions in Google Chrome prior to 140.0.7339.80 allowed a remote attacker to perform UI spoofing via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
1Apple
6Ipados
Iphone OsMacos+3 more
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 4, 2025
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
An access issue was addressed with additional sandbox restrictions. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A...Show more
An access issue was addressed with additional sandbox restrictions. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A sandboxed app may be able to observe system-wide network connections.Show less
1Microsoft
1Edge Chromium
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 31, 2025
N/A· v4
6.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Protection mechanism failure in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
1Azure Access
2Blu Ic2 Firmware
Blu Ic4 Firmware
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 31, 2025
6.9 MEDIUM· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Missing Security Headers.This issue affects BLU-IC2: through 1.19.5; BLU-IC4: through 1.19.5.
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 31, 2025
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The OOPSpam Anti-Spam: Spam Protection for WordPress Forms & Comments (No CAPTCHA) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to IP Header Spoofing in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.53. This is due to the plugin trusting...Show more
The OOPSpam Anti-Spam: Spam Protection for WordPress Forms & Comments (No CAPTCHA) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to IP Header Spoofing in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.53. This is due to the plugin trusting client-controlled forwarded headers (such as CF-Connecting-IP, X-Forwarded-For, and others) without verifying that those headers originate from legitimate, trusted proxies. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to spoof their IP address and bypass IP-based security controls, including blocked IP lists and rate limiting protections, by sending arbitrary HTTP headers with their requests.Show less
1Hcltech
2Bigfix Mobile
Bigfix Modern Client Management
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 16, 2025
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
HCL BigFix Mobile 3.3 and earlier are vulnerable to certain insecure directives within the Content Security Policy (CSP). An attacker could trick users into performing actions by not properly restricting the sources of...Show more
HCL BigFix Mobile 3.3 and earlier are vulnerable to certain insecure directives within the Content Security Policy (CSP). An attacker could trick users into performing actions by not properly restricting the sources of scripts and other content.Show less
1Hcltech
2Bigfix Mobile
Bigfix Modern Client Management
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 16, 2025
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
HCL BigFix Modern Client Management (MCM) 3.3 and earlier are vulnerable to certain insecure directives within the Content Security Policy (CSP). An attacker could trick users into performing actions by not properly res...Show more
HCL BigFix Modern Client Management (MCM) 3.3 and earlier are vulnerable to certain insecure directives within the Content Security Policy (CSP). An attacker could trick users into performing actions by not properly restricting the sources of scripts and other content.Show less
1Hcltech
1Unica
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 12, 2025
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
HCL Unica Platform is impacted by misconfigured security related HTTP headers. This can lead to less secure browser default treatment for the policies controlled by these headers.
1Apple
1Macos
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 9, 2025
N/A· v4
5.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A logic issue was addressed with improved validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Tahoe 26. An app may bypass Gatekeeper checks.
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 22, 2025
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability was discovered in ARD. The flaw exists in the `fe_uid` parameter of the payment history API endpoint. An authenticated attacker can manipulate this parameter to ac...Show more
An Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability was discovered in ARD. The flaw exists in the `fe_uid` parameter of the payment history API endpoint. An authenticated attacker can manipulate this parameter to access the payment history of other users without authorization.Show less
1Mmaitre314
1Picklescan
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 17, 2025
9.3 CRITICAL· v4
7.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A Protection Mechanism Failure vulnerability in mmaitre314 picklescan versions up to and including 0.0.30 allows a remote attacker to bypass the unsafe globals check. This is possible because the scanner performs an exac...Show more
A Protection Mechanism Failure vulnerability in mmaitre314 picklescan versions up to and including 0.0.30 allows a remote attacker to bypass the unsafe globals check. This is possible because the scanner performs an exact match for module names, allowing malicious payloads to be loaded via submodules of dangerous packages (e.g., 'asyncio.unix_events' instead of 'asyncio'). When the incorrectly considered safe file is loaded after scan, it can lead to the execution of malicious code.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 16, 2025
N/A· v4
8.6 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability in the HPE Aruba Networking SD-WAN Gateways could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass firewall protections. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to route potentially harmful traf...Show more
A vulnerability in the HPE Aruba Networking SD-WAN Gateways could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass firewall protections. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to route potentially harmful traffic through the internal network, leading to unauthorized access or disruption of services.Show less
1Mozilla
2Firefox
Thunderbird
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 16, 2025
N/A· v4
7.3 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Sandbox escape due to undefined behavior, invalid pointer in the Graphics: Canvas2D component. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox 143, Firefox ESR 140.3, Thunderbird 143, and Thunderbird 140.3.
1Apple
1Macos
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 15, 2025
N/A· v4
8.2 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
This issue was addressed by removing the vulnerable code. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7, macOS Tahoe 26. An app may be able to break out of its sandbox.
1Microsoft
15Windows 10 1507
Windows 10 1607Windows 10 1809+12 more
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 9, 2025
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Protection mechanism failure in Windows MapUrlToZone allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 8, 2025
N/A· v4
7.4 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
The Microsoft vulnerable driver block list is implemented as Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) policy. Entries that specify only the to-be-signed (TBS) part of the code signer certificate are properly blocked,...Show more
The Microsoft vulnerable driver block list is implemented as Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) policy. Entries that specify only the to-be-signed (TBS) part of the code signer certificate are properly blocked, but entries that specify the signing certificate's TBS hash along with a 'FileAttribRef' qualifier (such as file name or version) may not be blocked, whether hypervisor-protected code integrity (HVCI) is enabled or not. NOTE: The vendor disputes this CVE ID assignment and states that the driver blocklist is intended for use with HVCI.Show less