<?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, 12 Oct 2026 04:45:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-21491</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-21491</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; svix&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Versions of the package svix before 1.17.0 are vulnerable to Authentication Bypass due to an issue in the verify function where signatures of different lengths are incorrectly compared. An attacker can bypass signature verification by providing a shorter signature that matches the beginning of the actual signature.&#13;&#13;**Note:**&#13;&#13;The attacker would need to know a victim uses the Rust library for verification,no easy way to automatically check that; and uses webhooks by a service that uses Svix, and then figure out a way to craft a malicious payload that will actually include all of the correct identifiers needed to trick the receivers to cause actual issues.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; svix&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Versions of the package svix before 1.17.0 are vulnerable to Authentication Bypass due to an issue in the verify function where signatures of different lengths are incorrectly compared. An attacker can bypass signature verification by providing a shorter signature that matches the beginning of the actual signature.&#13;&#13;**Note:**&#13;&#13;The attacker would need to know a victim uses the Rust library for verification,no easy way to automatically check that; and uses webhooks by a service that uses Svix, and then figure out a way to craft a malicious payload that will actually include all of the correct identifiers needed to trick the receivers to cause actual issues.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-21491</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RUSTSEC-2024-0010 — Improper comparison of different-length signatures</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/rustsec-2024-0010</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; crates.io: svix&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The `Webhook::verify` function incorrectly compared signatures of
different lengths - the two signatures would only be compared up to
the length of the shorter signature. This allowed an attacker to
pass in `v1,` as the signature, which would always pass verification.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; crates.io: svix&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The `Webhook::verify` function incorrectly compared signatures of
different lengths - the two signatures would only be compared up to
the length of the shorter signature. This allowed an attacker to
pass in `v1,` as the signature, which would always pass verification.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/rustsec-2024-0010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
