<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-06T14:11:15.941795+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>csirt@opendfir.org</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://cve.radiocsirt.org" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2025-66614</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-66614 — Apache Tomcat: Client certificate verification bypass due to virtual host mapping</title>
    <updated>2026-10-06T14:11:16.002728+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Apache Software Foundation Apache Tomcat</p>
<p>Improper Input Validation vulnerability.</p>
<p>This issue affects Apache Tomcat: from 11.0.0-M1 through 11.0.14, from 10.1.0-M1 through 10.1.49, from 9.0.0-M1 through 9.0.112.</p>
<p>The following versions were EOL at the time the CVE was created but are 
known to be affected: 8.5.0 through 8.5.100. Older EOL versions are not affected.
Tomcat did not validate that the host name provided via the SNI 
extension was the same as the host name provided in the HTTP host header 
field. If Tomcat was configured with more than one virtual host and the 
TLS configuration for one of those hosts did not require client 
certificate authentication but another one did, it was possible for a 
client to bypass the client certificate authentication by sending 
different host names in the SNI extension and the HTTP host header field.</p>
<p>The vulnerability only applies if client certificate authentication is 
only enforced at the Connector. It does not apply if client certificate 
authentication is enforced at the web application.</p>
<p>Users are recommended to upgrade to version 11.0.15 or later, 10.1.50 or later or 9.0.113 or later, which fix the issue.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2025-66614"/>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-6rw7-vpxm-498p</id>
    <title>GHSA-6rw7-vpxm-498p — qs's arrayLimit bypass in its bracket notation allows DoS via memory exhaustion</title>
    <updated>2026-10-06T14:11:16.002807+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> npm: qs</p>
<p>### Summary</p>
<p>The `arrayLimit` option in qs did not enforce limits for bracket notation (`a[]=1&amp;a[]=2`), only for indexed notation (`a[0]=1`). This is a consistency bug; `arrayLimit` should apply uniformly across all array notations.</p>
<p>**Note:** The default `parameterLimit` of 1000 effectively mitigates the DoS scenario originally described. With default options, bracket notation cannot produce arrays larger than `parameterLimit` regardless of `arrayLimit`, because each `a[]=value` consumes one parameter slot. The severity has been reduced accordingly.</p>
<p>### Details</p>
<p>The `arrayLimit` option only checked limits for indexed notation (`a[0]=1&amp;a[1]=2`) but did not enforce it for bracket notation (`a[]=1&amp;a[]=2`).</p>
<p>**Vulnerable code** (`lib/parse.js:159-162`):
```javascript
if (root === '[]' &amp;&amp; options.parseArrays) {
    obj = utils.combine([], leaf);  // No arrayLimit check
}
```</p>
<p>**Working code** (`lib/parse.js:175`):
```javascript
else if (index &lt;= options.arrayLimit) {  // Limit checked here
    obj = [];
    obj[index] = leaf;
}
```</p>
<p>The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses `utils.combine([], leaf)` without validating against `options.arrayLimit`, while indexed notation at line 175 checks `index &lt;= options.arrayLimit` before creating arrays.</p>
<p>### PoC</p>
<p>```javascript
const qs = require('qs');
const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&amp;a[]=2&amp;a[]=3&amp;a[]=4&amp;a[]=5&amp;a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 });
console.log(result.a.length);  // Output: 6 (should be max 5)
```</p>
<p>**Note on parameterLimit interaction…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-6rw7-vpxm-498p"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
