[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"landing-trending":3,"cve-CVE-2022-24833":30,"landing-articles":97},{"count":4,"next":5,"previous":6,"results":7},266,"http:\u002F\u002Fweb:8606\u002Fapi\u002Ftrending_attacks\u002F?page=2&page_size=3&sorted_by=-published_at",null,[8,17,20],{"id":9,"title":10,"summary":11,"published_at":12,"severity":13,"vendor":14,"products":15},265,"Google Brotli decoder - Remote Code Execution via compressed requests (Exploitation Check)","This control is the second step of the Patrowl response to CVE-2026-111497 (Node2Shell). It complements the first control of 22 October 2026, which focused on the Node.js runtime, and does not replace it.\r\n\r\nWhy a second control\r\n\r\nCVE-2026-111497 is an out-of-bounds write in the Google Brotli decoder, the library that decompresses Brotli (\"br\") data. It was first published as a Node.js vulnerability, because Node.js bundles this decoder. Later publications showed that the flaw is in the library itself. Every product that embeds an affected version of the decoder is concerned, whatever its language or vendor. A public proof of concept demonstrates code execution.\r\n\r\nAny server that decompresses request bodies sent with \"Content-Encoding: br\" exposes the decoder to unauthenticated attackers. Known cases include Express 5 and NestJS 11 on Node.js, Koa and Fastify setups, Bun, Envoy and Istio with request decompression enabled, and any application or reverse proxy that decodes Brotli request bodies with an affected library.\r\n\r\nThe flaw also works in the other direction. A malicious server can compromise an unpatched client that decodes a Brotli response, for example Node.js fetch(), Python clients (requests, httpx, aiohttp, Scrapy) with the Brotli or brotlicffi package, or libcurl builds with Brotli support.\r\n\r\nWhat this control checks\r\n\r\nPatrowl sends small, valid Brotli-compressed requests to each asset and observes whether the server decodes them. The check does not depend on the technology: it detects the behaviour, whatever the stack behind it. These requests are what any legitimate client could send. They never reach the vulnerable code path and cannot affect the availability of the service.\r\n\r\nHow to read the result\r\n\r\nPotentially impacted means the asset decodes Brotli request bodies: the attack surface is exposed. It does not confirm that the asset is vulnerable. The version of the Brotli decoder in use is not visible from the outside.\r\n\r\nThis check covers applications that parse request bodies on their root path. A Not impacted result does not rule out exposure on other routes, nor on the client side. Checking the versions on the servers remains the only exhaustive verification.\r\n\r\nAffected and fixed versions\r\n\r\nGoogle Brotli 1.0.3 to 1.2.0 are affected, fixed in 1.0.10, 1.1.1 and 1.2.1. Fixed releases of the main products embedding it: Node.js 22.23.4, 24.22.1 and 26.12.1 (end-of-life lines 20.x and older and 25.x receive no fix), Bun 1.4.4, Envoy 1.37.8, 1.38.6, 1.39.3 and 1.40.0, Istio 1.29.9, 1.30.6 and 1.31.2, Python Brotli 1.2.1 and brotlicffi 1.2.1.0. Products that link against the system library depend on the Brotli package of the Linux distribution.\r\n\r\nRecommendations\r\n\r\nUpdate every component that embeds the Brotli decoder (only real fix). Start with the assets flagged by this control. Restart the processes after the update. Rebuild containers, single-executable applications and appliances that bundle an affected runtime or library.\r\n\r\nReduce the exposure until the update is deployed. Reject requests with \"Content-Encoding: br\" at the reverse proxy, load balancer or WAF, case-insensitively and including lists such as \"gzip, br\". On Envoy and Istio, disable request decompression for Brotli.\r\n\r\nReview outbound calls. List the features that fetch content from servers you do not control, and patch the services that host them first.","2026-10-24T10:37:22.192753Z",4,"google",[16],"brotli",{"id":4,"title":10,"summary":18,"published_at":12,"severity":13,"vendor":14,"products":19},"This control is the second step of the Patrowl response to CVE-2026-111497 (Node2Shell). It complements the first control of 22 October 2026, which focused on the Node.js runtime, and does not replace it.\r\n\r\nWhy a second control\r\n\r\nCVE-2026-111497 is an out-of-bounds write in the Google Brotli decoder, the library that decompresses Brotli (\"br\") data. It was first published as a Node.js vulnerability, because Node.js bundles this decoder. Later publications showed that the flaw is in the library itself. Every product that embeds an affected version of the decoder is concerned, whatever its language or vendor. A public proof of concept demonstrates code execution.\r\n\r\nAny server that decompresses request bodies sent with \"Content-Encoding: br\" exposes the decoder to unauthenticated attackers. Known cases include Express 5 and NestJS 11 on Node.js, Koa and Fastify setups, Bun, Envoy and Istio with request decompression enabled, and any application or reverse proxy that decodes Brotli request bodies with an affected library.\r\n\r\nThe flaw also works in the other direction. A malicious server can compromise an unpatched client that decodes a Brotli response, for example Node.js fetch(), Python clients (requests, httpx, aiohttp, Scrapy) with the Brotli or brotlicffi package, or libcurl builds with Brotli support.\r\n\r\nWhat this control checks\r\n\r\nPatrowl sends small, valid Brotli-compressed requests to each asset and observes whether the server decodes them. The check does not depend on the technology: it detects the behaviour, whatever the stack behind it. These requests are what any legitimate client could send. They never reach the vulnerable code path and cannot affect the availability of the service.\r\n\r\nHow to read the result\r\n\r\nPotentially impacted means the asset decodes Brotli request bodies: the attack surface is exposed. It does not confirm that the asset is vulnerable. The version of the Brotli decoder in use is not visible from the outside.\r\n\r\nThis check covers applications that parse request bodies on their root path. A Not impacted result does not rule out exposure on other routes, nor on the client side. Checking the versions on the servers remains the only exhaustive verification.\r\n\r\nTwo situations are possible. When the decoding is done by your own application or reverse proxy, identify the component and update it. If an update is not possible right away, reject requests with \"Content-Encoding: br\" at the reverse proxy or WAF.\r\n\r\nWhen the asset is hosted on a managed platform or behind a CDN (for example Platform.sh, Upsun or Fastly), the decoding may be done by the provider's edge router, in front of your application. You cannot patch it yourself, but this router handles all the traffic of your site. Ask your provider to confirm that its edge components are patched against CVE-2026-111497. Assets hosted on a managed platform or behind a CDN carry the tag \"paas: platform.sh\" or \"cdn: fastly\" in the asset view: for these assets, the Brotli decoding is done by the provider's edge router, in front of your application, and only the provider can patch it.\r\n\r\nAffected and fixed versions\r\n\r\nGoogle Brotli 1.0.3 to 1.2.0 are affected, fixed in 1.0.10, 1.1.1 and 1.2.1. Fixed releases of the main products embedding it: Node.js 22.23.4, 24.22.1 and 26.12.1 (end-of-life lines 20.x and older and 25.x receive no fix), Bun 1.4.4, Envoy 1.37.8, 1.38.6, 1.39.3 and 1.40.0, Istio 1.29.9, 1.30.6 and 1.31.2, Python Brotli 1.2.1 and brotlicffi 1.2.1.0. Products that link against the system library depend on the Brotli package of the Linux distribution.\r\n\r\nRecommendations\r\n\r\nUpdate every component that embeds the Brotli decoder (only real fix). Start with the assets flagged by this control. Restart the processes after the update. Rebuild containers, single-executable applications and appliances that bundle an affected runtime or library.\r\n\r\nReduce the exposure until the update is deployed. Reject requests with \"Content-Encoding: br\" at the reverse proxy, load balancer or WAF, case-insensitively and including lists such as \"gzip, br\". On Envoy and Istio, disable request decompression for Brotli.\r\n\r\nContact your edge provider about the status of the pathing (Fastly \u002F Plateform.sh)\r\n\r\nReview outbound calls. List the features that fetch content from servers you do not control, and patch the services that host them first.",[16],{"id":21,"title":22,"summary":23,"published_at":24,"severity":13,"vendor":25,"products":26},263,"Oracle Java SE JSSE - Improper Access Control & Unauthorized Data Access & Unauthorized Data Modification","Oracle Java SE is the Java runtime and development platform. Its JSSE (Java Secure Socket Extension) component provides TLS\u002FSSL for secure network communication. Oracle GraalVM is a JDK distribution based on the same platform.\r\n\r\nCVE-2026-91403\r\n\r\nA vulnerability in the JSSE component of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK and Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition can be exploited by an unauthenticated attacker with network access over multiple protocols. A successful attack can give unauthorized access to critical data and allow unauthorized creation, deletion or modification of data. It can also affect sandboxed Java Web Start applications and applets that run untrusted code. The record lists the weakness as CWE-284 (Improper Access Control) in the CISA ADP entry, while another database lists CWE-295. The record lists these affected versions:\r\n- Oracle Java SE: 8u511, 8u511-perf, 11.0.33, 17.0.21, 21.0.13, 25.0.5, 27.0.1.\r\n- Oracle GraalVM for JDK: 17.0.21, 21.0.13.\r\n- Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition: 21.3.20.\r\n\r\nOracle published an out-of-cycle Security Alert on October 21, 2026. One secondary source says the fix makes Java distrust eight compromised intermediate CA certificates shipped with the JDK. The Oracle-focused sources do not confirm this root cause, so check it against the Oracle advisory. CISA ADP SSVC data shows Exploitation: none, Automatable: yes, Technical Impact: total. The CVE is not in the CISA KEV catalog as of October 22, 2026, and its EPSS score is below 1%.","2026-10-23T14:12:32.871954Z","Oracle",[27,28,29],"Oracle Java SE","Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition","Oracle GraalVM for JDK",{"id":31,"cve_id":32,"euvd_id":33,"summary":34,"published":35,"cvss_data":36,"is_remote":47,"cwes":48,"cpes":50,"technologies":67,"references":69,"score":74,"epss_score":75,"epss_percentile":76,"is_kev":77,"cisa_kev_date_added":6,"cisa_kev_due_date":6,"cisa_ssvc":78,"attack_mappings":88,"exploits":95},307267,"CVE-2022-24833","EUVD-2022-1711","Persistent Cross-site Scripting vulnerability in PrivateBin\n\nIn PrivateBin \u003C v1.4.0 a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability was found. The vulnerability is present since attachments with image preview got introduced in v0.21 of the project, which was at the time still called ZeroBin. The issue is caused by the fact that SVGs can contain JavaScript. This can allow an attacker to execute code, if the user opens a paste with a specifically crafted SVG attachment, and interacts with the preview image and the instance isn't protected by an appropriate content security policy.\n\nAs a consequence, we have mitigated the vulnerability in the preview and urge server administrators to either **upgrade** to a version with the fix or to ensure the content security policy of their instance is set correctly, ideally both. Additionally, we expanded our [directory listing tool with a checking mechanism](https:\u002F\u002Fprivatebin.info\u002Fdirectory\u002Fcheck) and **highly suggest server administrators to check their instance there** and, should there be a warning regarding the content security policy **adjust the CSP to our suggested one**, as it is shown in the configuration preset.\n\n## Proof of concept\n\nThe vulnerability can be triggered as following:\n\n1. Create the following SVG as a file:\n```svg\n\u003C?xml version=\"1.0\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\u003C!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC \"-\u002F\u002FW3C\u002F\u002FDTD SVG 1.1\u002F\u002FEN\" \"http:\u002F\u002Fwww.w3.org\u002FGraphics\u002FSVG\u002F1.1\u002FDTD\u002Fsvg11.dtd\">\n\n\u003Csvg version=\"1.1\" baseProfile=\"full\" xmlns=\"http:\u002F\u002Fwww.w3.org\u002F2000\u002Fsvg\">\n \u003Cpolygon id=\"triangle\" points=\"0,0 0,50 50,0\" fill=\"#009900\" stroke=\"#004400\"\u002F>\n \u003Cscript type=\"text\u002Fjavascript\">\n   alert(document.domain);\n \u003C\u002Fscript>\n\u003C\u002Fsvg>\n```\n2. Upload it as an attachment to a PrivateBin instance that has attachments enabled and hasn't set the recommended content security policy (in particular, one that has either no content security policy set or that allows `*` or `blob:` as a `script-src`).\n3. Open the paste. (In a real attack scenario this would be done by the victim.)\n4. The SVG is rendered safely as a preview, and script isn't yet executed.\n5. Now (depending on your device) right-click or long tap on the image and open it in a new tab.\n6. Now a `blob:` URI opens in a new tab with the image and the modal is shown, therefore the script got executed.\n\n## Impact\n\nWe tried to reproduce the vulnerability and in our assessment, we found out the following:\n\n1. Any users who use our recommended _Content Security Policy_ (CSP), even older, less strict ones, are **not affected** by this vulnerability, if a [CSP compatible browser](https:\u002F\u002Fcaniuse.com\u002Fcontentsecuritypolicy) is used. All the browsers we tested with did pass on the CSP to the new tab that is opened when viewing the SVG by itself.\n  As PrivateBin ships with a [built-in CSP](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fwiki\u002FConfiguration#cspheader), we consider this a strong defence in depth against these and related issues. That said, we think the CSP should only be the last layer of defence and as such, we decided to still apply further mitigations for this security issue.\n2. Instances that do not have attachments enabled, are not affected. Even when attachments are uploaded using a third-party client, they can't be rendered when the administrator disables them (the HTML element that they would render in isn't present and before 1.4 this caused an error, we now catch the error and only display the paste text) and thus potential exploits in the attachment file do not apply.\n3. The inline preview (step 4 above) does _not_ execute the script, because [browsers explicitly restrict SVGs if the they are is embedded in an `img` tag](https:\u002F\u002Fdeveloper.mozilla.org\u002Fen-US\u002Fdocs\u002FWeb\u002FSVG\u002FSVG_as_an_Image#restrictions) to prevent such security issues in images. Thus, [SVGs in `img` tags itself can be considered safe](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.w3.org\u002FTR\u002FCSP2\u002F#which-policy-applies).\n  However, when the user opens the SVG in a new tab, this browser security feature is circumvented. That's why the exploit steps above explain to open the SVG in a new tab. That being said, the impact of the vulnerability is reduced by two factors:\n    1. The attack explicitly requires **user-interaction**, i.e. the user has to be tricked into opening the preview in a new tab for some reason. This could realistically be achieved with some social engineering: The markdown formatted text part of the paste could include such an instruction as a big, bold title, or the SVG could be very large and have very small text, which the user might want to zoom into, in order to read. \n    2. Potential exploit code can only run in a new tab. It still has the same origin (as can be seen in the PoC above, because the domain\u002Forigin the script is running on, is shown). However, though, sensitive information like the paste content, potential comments or encryption key (in the URL) is not accessible to the attacker as the context is now a blob-URL – and would anyway consist mostly of things the attacker initially created itself.\n      That said, [the same origin policy applies](https:\u002F\u002Fdeveloper.mozilla.org\u002Fen-US\u002Fdocs\u002FWeb\u002FSecurity\u002FSame-origin_policy) and thus, what an attacker could do is read e.g. cookies and local storage data saved in the same origin. As PrivateBin itself does not use any of that, the impact of this vulnerability is limited. However, as PrivateBin is a software for self-hosting, it cannot be excluded that other services run in the same origin (e.g. on the same domain). That's why server administrators may need to evaluate the impact of running arbitrary JavaScript code on their domain\u002Forigin where PrivateBin is hosted by themselves.\n\nTo summarize, this shows a fairly limited impact, given even if the CSP had not caught the issue, the user still needs to interact with the page and the exploit code cannot access or exfiltrate any data of the PrivateBin instance.\n**Note:** However, take our assessment only as a basis for your own assessment. As explained, depending on your environment, the actual risk may vary if you are hosting other services on the same domain as PrivateBin.\n\nAs for the metrics, the impact assessment we have done with [CVSS v3.1](https:\u002F\u002Fnvd.nist.gov\u002Fvuln-metrics\u002Fcvss) results in this:\n[AV:N\u002FAC:L\u002FPR:N\u002FUI:R\u002FS:U\u002FC:L\u002FI:N\u002FA:N\u002FE:F\u002FRL:U\u002FRC:C\u002FCR:X\u002FIR:X\u002FAR:X\u002FMAV:N\u002FMAC:L\u002FMPR:N\u002FMUI:R\u002FMS:U\u002FMC:X\u002FMI:X\u002FMA:X](https:\u002F\u002Fnvd.nist.gov\u002Fvuln-metrics\u002Fcvss\u002Fv3-calculator?vector=AV:N\u002FAC:L\u002FPR:N\u002FUI:R\u002FS:U\u002FC:L\u002FI:N\u002FA:N\u002FE:F\u002FRL:U\u002FRC:C\u002FCR:X\u002FIR:X\u002FAR:X\u002FMAV:N\u002FMAC:L\u002FMPR:N\u002FMUI:R\u002FMS:U\u002FMC:X\u002FMI:X\u002FMA:X&version=3.1)\n\n### Real-life impact\n\nWe found two affected instances in our instance lists (wiki, directory) that did not serve a correct Content Security Policy header, had attachments enabled and thus are vulnerable to this attack. We didn't manage to get into contact with the administrators of these sites, though.\n\nIn addition to that, we found that multiple instances do seem to either strip our CSP or have it changed to an unsafe setting and have thus expanded our directory service to verify whether our recommend CSP is used or not. (see below)\nWe have no reports that indicate this vulnerability was or is being actively exploited at the time of this report.\n\n## Patches\nTo fix the problem, we took the following measures (in no particular order):\n\n* We apply [DOMpurify](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fcure53\u002FDOMPurify\u002F) (a library we already use to sanitize user-submitted HTML via the Markdown format) to the SVG preview, too. It strips script tags and other uncommon security-relevant and potentially malicious tags\u002Fproperties from the SVG file.\n  So whether you open the SVG in a new tab or not and whether CSP is present and enabled or not does not matter any more, as the displayed SVG is sanitized.\n* As a further defence in depth mechanism we now send the CSP both as an HTTP header, as well as a meta tag. This protects instance with  mis-configured web servers, CDNs, proxy or similar, from stripping or breaking the CSP headers, as they still get the CSP inside of the HTML content itself. Please note though, that the [meta tag approach is not as strong as the HTTP header approach](https:\u002F\u002Fcontent-security-policy.com\u002Fexamples\u002Fmeta\u002F) and should thus only be considered as a fallback. \n* The [PrivateBin Directory](https:\u002F\u002Fprivatebin.info\u002F) now also scans whether the recommend Content-Security-Policy header is used on a given instance. If you do not want to have your website appear in the list, but check it manually [you can use a separate check page](https:\u002F\u002Fprivatebin.info\u002Fdirectory\u002Fcheck) there.\n\nThe code-changes in PrivateBin can be found in https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fpull\u002F906.\n\n**Note:** Please note that we explicitly chose to _not_ apply _DOMPurify_ if you download the (SVG) attachment with the download button. Subsequently, if a user would manually opens the downloaded SVG in the browser, it will be opened from the `file:\u002F\u002F` protocol and thus from a [different origin](https:\u002F\u002Fdeveloper.mozilla.org\u002Fen-US\u002Fdocs\u002FWeb\u002FSecurity\u002FSame-origin_policy), so all reference to the download location is lost and no more security risk is associated with that, than opening any website or local HTML file. Thus, the SVG file with stay intact in it's original form, if you download the attachment. \nWe consider the execution of code from attachments outside of the PrivateBin instance's context to be out of scope to mitigate (i.e. malware in executables, office documents macros, PDF scripts), as all of these require client side mitigations to be applied to all such downloaded file types, independent on where they get downloaded from.\n\n## Workarounds\n\nWe strongly recommend you to upgrade to our latest release, especially as we also upgraded outdated and potential vulnerable libraries (see below). However, here are two workarounds that may help you to mitigate this vulnerability:\n\n* Update the [CSP in your configuration file](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fwiki\u002FConfiguration#cspheader) to the latest recommended settings and check that it isn't getting reverted or overwritten by your web server, reverse proxy or CDN, i.e. using [our offered check service](https:\u002F\u002Fprivatebin.info\u002Fdirectory\u002Fcheck).\n* Deploying PrivateBin on a separate domain may limit the scope of the vulnerability to PrivateBin itself and thus, as described in the “Impact” section, effectively prevent any damage by the vulnerability to other resources you are hosting.\n* As explained in the impact assessment, disabling attachments also prevents this issue.\n\n## References\nWe highly encourage server administrators and others involved with the PrivateBin project to read-up on how Content-Security-Policies work, especially should you consider to manually adjust it:\n* https:\u002F\u002Fcontent-security-policy.com\u002F\n* https:\u002F\u002Fdeveloper.mozilla.org\u002Fdocs\u002FWeb\u002FHTTP\u002FCSP\n* https:\u002F\u002Fdevelopers.google.com\u002Fweb\u002Ffundamentals\u002Fsecurity\u002Fcsp\u002F\n\nAlso please note that if multiple headers are set (as e.g. done via our now introduced meta tag) [browsers should apply the most restrictive set of the policies](https:\u002F\u002Fstackoverflow.com\u002Fa\u002F51153816\u002F5008962), [as per the CSP specification](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.w3.org\u002FTR\u002FCSP2\u002F#enforcing-multiple-policies).\n\n## For more information\n\nPlease notice we also upgraded [jQuery](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fpull\u002F880) that was reported to us as being vulnerable both by [our automated container security scanning](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fdocker-nginx-fpm-alpine\u002Fissues\u002F69#issue-1006943396) as well as [by users](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fissues\u002F864).\nBy doing so, we also updated all [other dependencies we use](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fpull\u002F888). Our tooling identified the following vulnerabilities in jQuery:\n  * CVE-2020-11023\n  * CVE-2020-11022 \n\nIn [a limited assessment about these when we were made aware of them](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fdocker-nginx-fpm-alpine\u002Fissues\u002F69#issuecomment-928261418) we could not find any immediate risk, but nevertheless, we encourage users to upgrade to be on the safe side.\n\nFinally, we also [upgraded zlib](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fpull\u002F909) to address CVE-2018-25032.\n\n## Timeline\n\n* 2022-02-22 – Initial contact by reporter.\n* 2022-02-25 – Reporter sends in a detailed report.\n* 2022-02-26 – Report gets reviewed, initial findings around the content security get shared and reporter withdraws report.\n* 2022-04-09 – Vulnerability details published.\n\n## Credits\n\nThis vulnerability was reported by Ian Budd, [Nethemba s.r.o](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nethemba.com\u002F), which we'd like to thank for that.\nIn general, we'd like to thank everyone reporting issues and potential vulnerabilities to us.\n\nIf you think you have found a vulnerability or potential security risk, [we'd kindly ask you to follow our security policy](https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002FSECURITY.md) and report it to us. We then assess the report and will take the actions we deem necessary to address it.","2022-04-12T20:45:00Z",{"cvss_v3.1":37},{"scope":38,"version":39,"baseScore":40,"attackVector":41,"baseSeverity":42,"vectorString":43,"integrityImpact":44,"userInteraction":45,"attackComplexity":44,"availabilityImpact":46,"privilegesRequired":46,"confidentialityImpact":42},"CHANGED","3.1",8.2,"NETWORK","HIGH","CVSS:3.1\u002FAV:N\u002FAC:L\u002FPR:N\u002FUI:R\u002FS:C\u002FC:H\u002FI:L\u002FA:N","LOW","REQUIRED","NONE",true,[49],"CWE-79",[51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66],"cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.1.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3.4:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:0.21.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.2.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:0.22:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.2.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:0.21:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.3.5:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe:2.3:a:privatebin:privatebin:1.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",[68],"Privatebin Privatebin",[70,71,72,73],"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fcommit\u002F2a4d572c1e9eb9b608d32b0cc0cb3b6c3b684eab","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin\u002Fsecurity\u002Fadvisories\u002FGHSA-cqcc-mm6x-vmvw","https:\u002F\u002Fnvd.nist.gov\u002Fvuln\u002Fdetail\u002FCVE-2022-24833","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrivateBin\u002FPrivateBin",0.76,0.01358,0.71468,false,{"timestamp":79,"automatable":80,"tech_impact":81,"exploitation":82,"cisa_decision":83,"cisa_remediation_timeline":87},"2025-04-22T15:48:55.618680Z","no","partial","poc",{"vector":84,"decision":85,"priority":86},"CISAv1\u002FE:P\u002FA:N\u002FT:P\u002FM:H\u002F2026-10-26T02:07:08.736457\u002F","track_star","medium","60D",[89],{"name":90,"source":91,"tactics":92,"technique_id":94},"Exploit Public-Facing Application","attack_vector",[93],"initial-access","T1190",[96],{"link":71},{"count":98,"next":99,"previous":6,"results":100},26,"http:\u002F\u002Fweb:8606\u002Fapi\u002Farticles\u002F?page=2&page_size=3&sorted_by=-published_at",[101,109,117],{"id":102,"title":103,"summary":104,"published_at":105,"type":106,"link":107,"image_url":108},30,"PHP2Shell: Two Critical RCE Flaws in PHP (CVSS 9.2)","Unauthenticated code execution demonstrated on WordPress, Drupal and Joomla, and reproduced in our lab. Patched versions and steps to take today.","2026-10-22T00:00:00Z","cve","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fen\u002Fblog\u002Fphp2shell-2-critical-rce-flaws-php-cvss-9-2","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fmedia\u002Fsite\u002Fc0615c4ee6-1792684469\u002Fphp2shell-2-critical-rce-flaws-php-cvss-9-2.png",{"id":110,"title":111,"summary":112,"published_at":113,"type":114,"link":115,"image_url":116},29,"Manage External Security Across All Your Entities","Centralize the management of entities, users and external security resources while maintaining strict data isolation with Patrowl.","2026-09-15T00:00:00Z","security tips","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fen\u002Fblog\u002Fmulti-entity-external-security-how-structure-governance-group-level","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fmedia\u002Fsite\u002F8b2c0cc5eb-1789551467\u002Fvisu_1_multi_tenancy_dark_1x.webp",{"id":118,"title":119,"summary":120,"published_at":121,"type":122,"link":123,"image_url":124},28,"Will AI Become the Next Hacker? Bruce Schneier Answers at DEF CON 34","Tax law, finance, legislation: Bruce Schneier shows how AI could hack human rule systems just as easily as it hacks software.","2026-09-14T00:00:00Z","hacks","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fen\u002Fblog\u002Fbruce-schneier-def-con-34","https:\u002F\u002Fpatrowl.io\u002Fmedia\u002Fsite\u002F5c616d9db4-1789462598\u002Fai-hacker.en.png"]