https://cve.radiocsirt.org Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Thu, 08 Oct 2026 01:59:41 +0000 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-231995 EUVD-2026-231995 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-231995 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-32792 <p>SES safely executes third-party JavaScript &#39;strict&#39; mode programs in compartments that have no excess authority in their global scope. Prior to version 1.12.0, web pages and web extensions using `ses` and the Compartment API to evaluate third-party code in an isolated execution environment that have also elsewhere used `const`, `let`, and `class` bindings in the top-level scope of a `&lt;script&gt;` tag will have inadvertently revealed these bindings in the lexical scope of third-party code. This issue has been patched in version 1.12.0. Workarounds for this issue involve either avoiding top-level `let`, `const`, or `class` bindings in `&lt;script&gt;` tags, or change these to `var` bindings to be reflected on `globalThis`.</p> <p>SES safely executes third-party JavaScript &#39;strict&#39; mode programs in compartments that have no excess authority in their global scope. Prior to version 1.12.0, web pages and web extensions using `ses` and the Compartment API to evaluate third-party code in an isolated execution environment that have also elsewhere used `const`, `let`, and `class` bindings in the top-level scope of a `&lt;script&gt;` tag will have inadvertently revealed these bindings in the lexical scope of third-party code. This issue has been patched in version 1.12.0. Workarounds for this issue involve either avoiding top-level `let`, `const`, or `class` bindings in `&lt;script&gt;` tags, or change these to `var` bindings to be reflected on `globalThis`.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-32792 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-h9w6-f932-gq62 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> npm: ses</p> <p>### Impact</p> <p>Web pages and web extensions using `ses` and the `Compartment` API to evaluate third-party code in an isolated execution environment that have also elsewhere used `const`, `let`, and `class` bindings in the top-level scope of a `&lt;script&gt;` tag will have inadvertently revealed these bindings in the lexical scope of third-party code.</p> <p>### Patches</p> <p>This compromise is addressed in `ses` version `1.12.0`. The mechanism for confining third-party code involves a `with` block and a semi-opaque scope `Proxy`. The proxy previously revealed any named property to the surrounding lexical scope if it were absent on `globalThis`, so that the third-party code would receive an informative `ReferenceError`, relying on the invalid assumption that only properties of `globalThis` are in the top-level lexical scope. The solution makes the scope proxy fully opaque. Consequently, accessing an unbound free lexical name will produce `undefined` instead of throwing `ReferenceError`. Assigning to an unbound free lexical name will continue to throw a `ReferenceError`.</p> <p>### Workarounds</p> <p>This problem can be mitigated either by avoiding top-level `let`, `const`, or `class` bindings in `&lt;script&gt;` tags, which is an existing industry best-practice, or change these to `var` bindings to be reflected on `globalThis`, or upgrade `ses` to version `1.12.0` or greater.</p> <p>Some bundlers by default transform top-level `let`, `const`, and `class` bindings to `var`.</p> <p>### Disclosure</p> <p>This vulnerability was discl…</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> npm: ses</p> <p>### Impact</p> <p>Web pages and web extensions using `ses` and the `Compartment` API to evaluate third-party code in an isolated execution environment that have also elsewhere used `const`, `let`, and `class` bindings in the top-level scope of a `&lt;script&gt;` tag will have inadvertently revealed these bindings in the lexical scope of third-party code.</p> <p>### Patches</p> <p>This compromise is addressed in `ses` version `1.12.0`. The mechanism for confining third-party code involves a `with` block and a semi-opaque scope `Proxy`. The proxy previously revealed any named property to the surrounding lexical scope if it were absent on `globalThis`, so that the third-party code would receive an informative `ReferenceError`, relying on the invalid assumption that only properties of `globalThis` are in the top-level lexical scope. The solution makes the scope proxy fully opaque. Consequently, accessing an unbound free lexical name will produce `undefined` instead of throwing `ReferenceError`. Assigning to an unbound free lexical name will continue to throw a `ReferenceError`.</p> <p>### Workarounds</p> <p>This problem can be mitigated either by avoiding top-level `let`, `const`, or `class` bindings in `&lt;script&gt;` tags, which is an existing industry best-practice, or change these to `var` bindings to be reflected on `globalThis`, or upgrade `ses` to version `1.12.0` or greater.</p> <p>Some bundlers by default transform top-level `let`, `const`, and `class` bindings to `var`.</p> <p>### Disclosure</p> <p>This vulnerability was discl…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-h9w6-f932-gq62