<?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>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 15:28:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-358865</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-358865</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-358865</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-358865</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2026-72700</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-72700</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The getgrav/grav-plugin-login Composer plugin before 3.9.1 (used by Grav) compares password reset and account activation tokens using a non-constant-time === string comparison instead of hash_equals() in classes/Controller.php (taskReset()) and login.php (activation handler). Because the token-submission endpoint (taskReset) also lacks rate limiting, an attacker could in principle send repeated token guesses against a known username and use the timing differences to attempt to recover a valid token, though the vendor rates the practical exploitability as low and no end-to-end network exploit has been demonstrated.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;The getgrav/grav-plugin-login Composer plugin before 3.9.1 (used by Grav) compares password reset and account activation tokens using a non-constant-time === string comparison instead of hash_equals() in classes/Controller.php (taskReset()) and login.php (activation handler). Because the token-submission endpoint (taskReset) also lacks rate limiting, an attacker could in principle send repeated token guesses against a known username and use the timing differences to attempt to recover a valid token, though the vendor rates the practical exploitability as low and no end-to-end network exploit has been demonstrated.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-72700</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-92vc-67q9-382j</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-92vc-67q9-382j</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The getgrav/grav-plugin-login Composer plugin before 3.9.1 (used by Grav) compares password reset and account activation tokens using a non-constant-time === string comparison instead of hash_equals() in classes/Controller.php (taskReset()) and login.php (activation handler). Because the token-submission endpoint (taskReset) also lacks rate limiting, an attacker could in principle send repeated token guesses against a known username and use the timing differences to attempt to recover a valid token, though the vendor rates the practical exploitability as low and no end-to-end network exploit has been demonstrated.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;The getgrav/grav-plugin-login Composer plugin before 3.9.1 (used by Grav) compares password reset and account activation tokens using a non-constant-time === string comparison instead of hash_equals() in classes/Controller.php (taskReset()) and login.php (activation handler). Because the token-submission endpoint (taskReset) also lacks rate limiting, an attacker could in principle send repeated token guesses against a known username and use the timing differences to attempt to recover a valid token, though the vendor rates the practical exploitability as low and no end-to-end network exploit has been demonstrated.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-92vc-67q9-382j</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
