<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 16:18:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-261768</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-261768</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-261768</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-261768</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2025-65111</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-65111</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;SpiceDB is an open source database system for creating and managing security-critical application permissions. Prior to version 1.47.1, if a schema includes the following characteristics: permission defined in terms of a union (+) and that union references the same relation on both sides (but one side arrows to a different permission). Then SpiceDB may have missing LookupResources results when checking the permission. This only affects LookupResources; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly. The issue is fixed in version 1.47.1.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;SpiceDB is an open source database system for creating and managing security-critical application permissions. Prior to version 1.47.1, if a schema includes the following characteristics: permission defined in terms of a union (+) and that union references the same relation on both sides (but one side arrows to a different permission). Then SpiceDB may have missing LookupResources results when checking the permission. This only affects LookupResources; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly. The issue is fixed in version 1.47.1.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-65111</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr — SpiceDB: LookupResources with Multiple Entrypoints across Different Definitions Can Return Incomplete Results</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Go: github.com/authzed/spicedb&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If your schema includes the following characteristics:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1. You have a permission defined in terms of a union (`+`)
1. That union references the same relation on both sides, but one side arrows to a different permission&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Then you might have missing `LookupResources` results when checking the permission. This only affects `LookupResources`; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A small concrete example:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;```
relation doer_of_things: user | group#member
permission do_the_thing = doer_of_things + doer_of_things-&amp;gt;admin
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A CheckPermission on `do_the_thing` will return the correct permissionship, but a LookupResources on `do_the_thing` may miss resources.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;#### A Comprehensive Example&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If you have a schema with a structure like this:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;```
definition special_user {}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;definition user {
  relation special_user_mapping: special_user
  permission special_user = special_user_mapping
}
definition group {
   relation member: user
   permission membership = member + member-&amp;gt;special_user
}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;definition system {
  relation viewer: user | group#membership
  // This is the problematic permission
  permission view = viewer + viewer-&amp;gt;special_user
}
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And these relationships:
```
system:somesystem#viewer@group:somegroup#membership
group:somegroup#member@user:someuser1
user:someuser1#special_user_mapping@special_user:specialuser
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And you call LookupResources with:
```
subject_type: user
subject_id: someuser1
permission: view
resource_type: system
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;You would expec…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Go: github.com/authzed/spicedb&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If your schema includes the following characteristics:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1. You have a permission defined in terms of a union (`+`)
1. That union references the same relation on both sides, but one side arrows to a different permission&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Then you might have missing `LookupResources` results when checking the permission. This only affects `LookupResources`; other APIs calculate permissionship correctly.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A small concrete example:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;```
relation doer_of_things: user | group#member
permission do_the_thing = doer_of_things + doer_of_things-&amp;gt;admin
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A CheckPermission on `do_the_thing` will return the correct permissionship, but a LookupResources on `do_the_thing` may miss resources.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;#### A Comprehensive Example&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If you have a schema with a structure like this:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;```
definition special_user {}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;definition user {
  relation special_user_mapping: special_user
  permission special_user = special_user_mapping
}
definition group {
   relation member: user
   permission membership = member + member-&amp;gt;special_user
}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;definition system {
  relation viewer: user | group#membership
  // This is the problematic permission
  permission view = viewer + viewer-&amp;gt;special_user
}
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And these relationships:
```
system:somesystem#viewer@group:somegroup#membership
group:somegroup#member@user:someuser1
user:someuser1#special_user_mapping@special_user:specialuser
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And you call LookupResources with:
```
subject_type: user
subject_id: someuser1
permission: view
resource_type: system
```&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;You would expec…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-9m7r-g8hg-x3vr</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
