https://cve.radiocsirt.org Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Fri, 02 Oct 2026 14:11:11 +0000 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bit-django-2026-15920 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Bitnami: django</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Bitnami: django</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bit-django-2026-15920 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-344161 EUVD-2026-344161 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-344161 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-15920 <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-15920 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-8rmj-xgq5-w9qm <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-8rmj-xgq5-w9qm https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/oesa-2026-3496 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> openEuler:22.03-LTS-SP4: python-django</p> <p>A high-level Python Web framework that encourages rapid development and clean, pragmatic design. Security Fix(es):</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. GeoDjango spatial lookups optimistically parse the right-hand-side value as a raster by passing it to the `django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster` constructor. Any value used in a spatial lookup against a `GeometryField` or `RasterField` reaches this constructor, including untrusted input, for example a spatial-field filter submitted through the Django admin changelist query string by a staff user with view permission. A `dict`, or a `str` holding its JSON representation, is opened in write mode regardless of the constructor&amp;apos;s `write=False` default, allowing a file with an attacker-chosen name and contents to be written through a file-backed GDAL driver. Any other `str` is treated as a datasource, allowing an outbound network request through a GDAL virtual filesystem handler. Writing a file to a location later imported by the application can result in remote code execution.(CVE-2026-15307)</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.utils.translation.check_for_language()` is subject to a potential denial-of-service attack when given many distinct, very long language codes, which are retained as keys in an in-memory cache and consume process memory. Such codes reach the function through the `django.views.i18n.set_language()` view, which is not rou…</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> openEuler:22.03-LTS-SP4: python-django</p> <p>A high-level Python Web framework that encourages rapid development and clean, pragmatic design. Security Fix(es):</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. GeoDjango spatial lookups optimistically parse the right-hand-side value as a raster by passing it to the `django.contrib.gis.gdal.GDALRaster` constructor. Any value used in a spatial lookup against a `GeometryField` or `RasterField` reaches this constructor, including untrusted input, for example a spatial-field filter submitted through the Django admin changelist query string by a staff user with view permission. A `dict`, or a `str` holding its JSON representation, is opened in write mode regardless of the constructor&amp;apos;s `write=False` default, allowing a file with an attacker-chosen name and contents to be written through a file-backed GDAL driver. Any other `str` is treated as a datasource, allowing an outbound network request through a GDAL virtual filesystem handler. Writing a file to a location later imported by the application can result in remote code execution.(CVE-2026-15307)</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.utils.translation.check_for_language()` is subject to a potential denial-of-service attack when given many distinct, very long language codes, which are retained as keys in an in-memory cache and consume process memory. Such codes reach the function through the `django.views.i18n.set_language()` view, which is not rou…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/oesa-2026-3496 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/opensuse-su-2026:11464-1 <p>python313-Django-6.0.8-1.1 on GA media</p> <p>python313-Django-6.0.8-1.1 on GA media</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/opensuse-su-2026:11464-1 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/suse-su-2026:3503-1 <p>Security update for python-Django</p> <p>Security update for python-Django</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/suse-su-2026:3503-1 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-15920 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:18.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:20.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:22.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:24.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:26.04:LTS: python-django</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:18.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:Pro:20.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:22.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:24.04:LTS: python-django, Ubuntu:26.04:LTS: python-django</p> <p>An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link. Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input. Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-15920 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2649 <p>Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Django ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, Daten zu manipulieren, Cross-Site-Scripting-Angriffe durchzuführen oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand auszulösen.</p> <p>Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Django ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, Daten zu manipulieren, Cross-Site-Scripting-Angriffe durchzuführen oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand auszulösen.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2649