CVE Database

Wazuh 5.0.0-beta1 (fixed in 5.0.0-beta3) does not validate or override the cluster_name and cluster_node fields in inventory-sync Start FlatBuffer messages, while validating only the agentid against the authenticated agent identity. This allows a low-privileged enrolled agent to spoof cluster attribution in indexed inventory and vulnerability documents by forging wazuh.cluster.name values and influencing the document _id prefix, potentially tampering with inventory records or, in shared-indexer multi-cluster deployments, poisoning another cluster's records when numeric agent IDs collide.

A flaw was found in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes (RHACS). When processing Kubernetes Deployments, ACS replaces deployment identity metadata based on the openshift.io/encoded-deployment-config label. A user with permission to create Deployments can set this label to "null", causing ACS to treat the workload as having empty UID, name and labels and namespace "default". This bypasses deploy-time policy detection and enforcement visibility, prevents correct persistence in Central and breaks violation reporting and compliance correlation for the affected deployment.

Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in Gleam allows an adversary in the middle to substitute forged Hex package contents during dependency resolution. During dependency resolution Gleam fetches package metadata from the signature-verified Hex repository, which covers each release's dependency requirements and SHA-256 outer_checksum. After resolving versions, gleam_cli::dependencies::lookup_package makes a second request to the unsigned Hex API through gleam_core::hex::get_package_release and records the outer_checksum and dependency names from that JSON response into manifest.toml, instead of the values from the verified repository metadata. The Hex repository signature does not cover the API response. An adversary in the middle who can intercept TLS with a certificate trusted by the Gleam process (for example a TLS-inspecting proxy using a CA in the operating system trust store or added through GLEAM_CACERTS_PATH), and who can modify both the API release response and the corresponding repository tarball, can supply a package archive with a matching forged checksum without the Hex repository signing key. Gleam verifies the forged tarball against the forged checksum, accepts it, and extracts it as a dependency source, resulting in loss of integrity of the downloaded package contents. Only projects that resolve or update Hex dependencies are affected, which happens when the manifest is missing, a dependency is added or updated, or dependency requirements change. Builds that reuse an unchanged, known-good manifest.toml continue to verify tarballs against its pinned checksum. This issue affects gleam: from 0.18.0 before 1.18.0.

A flaw was found in the Event-Driven Ansible (EDA) server. The ExternalEventStreamViewSet uses permissive access controls (permission_classes=[AllowAny], authentication_classes=[]) and relies solely on the Subject HTTP header value for mTLS authentication without verifying that the header originated from a trusted proxy. Additionally, the expected certificate Distinguished Name is leaked in the 403 error response body. An attacker who can reach the EDA API endpoint with a spoofed Subject header can inject arbitrary events into mTLS-protected event streams, triggering downstream automation actions.

Logto omits validation of the SAML <Conditions> element, enabling attackers to strip time and audience restrictions and replay assertions indefinitely.

In NLnet Labs Unbound 1.7.0 up to and including 1.25.1, insufficient validation of the RRSIG.Labels field combined with premature cache writes during RFC 8198 aggressive NSEC processing leads to cache poisoning that permits a malicious actor controlling a single delegated zone to poison arbitrary sibling zones under NSEC-signed parent domains. A malicious actor with one registered domain under an NSEC-signed TLD can serve malicious insecure DNS responses for unrelated sibling domains (sharing the same parent zone). Arbitrary delegations that do not exist under the parent domain and are covered by the parent's NSEC chain can be brought into insecure existence by fraudulent wildcard DS records (less labels than expected, unknown algorithm) from the malicious sibling domain. This allows the malicious actor to inject insecure wildcard records for those delegations.