ReservedCVE-2025-46642
Vulnerability CVE-2025-46642
Published Sources: BSI
What is affected, what to do
Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Dell PowerProtect Data Domain ausnutzen, um seine Privilegien zu erhöhen um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen, um einen Cross-Site Scripting Angriff durchzuführen, um Informationen offenzulegen, und um Dateien zu manipulieren.
The available sources name no fixed version. Check the vendor guidance in the references below.
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
—
Priority
No value is available for this vulnerability.
—
CVSS v3
No value is available for this vulnerability.
—
EPSS score
No value is available for this vulnerability.
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Reserved
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 77.02 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- no public PoC known
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- —
- Published
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- High technical severity: assess and remediate the vulnerability in vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2 and document the decision.
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Dell PowerProtect Data Domain ausnutzen, um seine Privilegien zu erhöhen um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen, um einen Cross-Site Scripting Angriff durchzuführen, um Informationen offenzulegen, und um Dateien zu manipulieren.
Source: BSI WID Portal, BSI CSAF
Included in the same advisory
| High | CVE-2026-56086 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Incorrect Authorization | 8.8 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-56085 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Use of Uninitialized Resource | 3.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-56084 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) | 5.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-54483 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 6.7 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2026-53483 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Improper Authentication | 9.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-53482 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Integer Overflow or Wraparound | 7.5 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2026-53481 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Path Traversal | 9.8 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-53480 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Path Traversal | 2.7 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-53479 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 7.2 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-53478 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 7.2 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-49815 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 7.2 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-49814 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 7.2 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-49813 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 6.7 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46730 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Incorrect Authorization | 4.2 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46468 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Link Following | 4.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46467 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File | 5.8 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-46466 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Use of Less Trusted Source | 2.7 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46465 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Use of Externally-Controlled Format String | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46464 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Link Following | 4.9 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-46463 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Integer Overflow or Wraparound | 6.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-44269 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Link Following | 4.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-44268 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource | 4.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-41124 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Path Traversal | 4.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-41123 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Improper Access Control | 4.3 | — |
Show 120 more CVEs
| High | CVE-2026-41122 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: Cross-site Scripting | 7.1 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-3784 | wrong proxy connection reuse with credentials | 6.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-3783 | token leak with redirect and netrc | 5.3 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-32778 | libexpat Project libexpat: NULL Pointer Dereference | 2.9 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-32777 | libexpat Project libexpat: Infinite Loop | 4.0 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-32776 | libexpat Project libexpat: NULL Pointer Dereference | 4.0 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-27171 | zlib: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-26355 | Dell PowerProtect Data Domain: OS Command Injection | 6.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-25646 | LIBPNG has a heap buffer overflow in png_set_quantize | 8.1 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-25210 | libexpat Project libexpat: Integer Overflow or Wraparound | 7.8 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-24515 | libexpat Project libexpat: NULL Pointer Dereference | 2.9 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-24049 | wheel Allows Arbitrary File Permission Modification via Path Traversal | 7.1 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-23490 | pyasn1 has a DoS vulnerability in decoder | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-22801 | LIBPNG has an integer truncation causing heap buffer over-read in png_image_write_* | 7.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-22796 | ASN1_TYPE Type Confusion in the PKCS7_digest_from_attributes() function | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-22795 | Missing ASN1_TYPE validation in PKCS#12 parsing | 5.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-22695 | Pnggroup Libpng: Out-of-bounds Read | 7.1 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-22184 | zlib <= 1.3.1.2 untgz Global Buffer Overflow in TGZfname() | 7.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-21441 | Urllib3: Improper Handling of Highly Compressed Data (Data Amplification) | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-2007 | PostgreSQL pg_trgm heap buffer overflow writes pattern onto server memory | 8.2 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-2006 | PostgreSQL missing validation of multibyte character length executes arbitrary code | 8.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-2005 | PostgreSQL pgcrypto heap buffer overflow executes arbitrary code | 8.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2026-2004 | PostgreSQL: Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input | 8.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-2003 | PostgreSQL oidvector discloses a few bytes of memory | 4.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-1965 | bad reuse of HTTP Negotiate connection | 6.5 | — |
| Low | CVE-2026-1703 | Limited path traversal when installing wheel archives | — | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-1299 | email BytesGenerator header injection due to unquoted newlines | — | — |
| High | CVE-2026-0915 | getnetbyaddr and getnetbyaddr_r leak stack contents to DNS resovler | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-0865 | wsgiref.headers.Headers allows header newline injection | — | — |
| High | CVE-2026-0861 | Integer overflow in memalign leads to heap corruption | 8.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2026-0672 | Header injection in http.cookies.Morsel | — | — |
| High | CVE-2025-9900 | Libtiff: libtiff write-what-where | 8.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-9714 | Stack overflow in libxml2 | 6.2 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-9230 | Out-of-bounds read & write in RFC 3211 KEK Unwrap | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-9086 | Out of bounds read for cookie path | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-8732 | libxml2 xmlcatalog xmlParseSGMLCatalog recursion | 3.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-8058 | The GNU C Library Glibc: Double Free | — | — |
| High | CVE-2025-7546 | GNU Binutils elf.c bfd_elf_set_group_contents out-of-bounds write | 7.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-7545 | GNU Binutils objcopy.c copy_section heap-based overflow | 7.8 | — |
| Low | CVE-2025-7039 | Glib: buffer under-read on glib through glib/gfileutils.c via get_tmp_file() | 3.7 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-69421 | NULL Pointer Dereference in PKCS12_item_decrypt_d2i_ex function | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-69420 | Missing ASN1_TYPE validation in TS_RESP_verify_response() function | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-69419 | Out of bounds write in PKCS12_get_friendlyname() UTF-8 conversion | 7.4 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-69418 | Unauthenticated/unencrypted trailing bytes with low-level OCB function calls | 4.0 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-68973 | GnuPG: Multiple Operations on Resource in Single-Operation Context | 7.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-68972 | GnuPG: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature | 5.9 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2025-6897 | D-Link DI-7300G+ httpd_debug.asp os command injection | 9.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-68161 | Apache Log4j Core: Missing TLS hostname verification in Socket appender | 4.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-68160 | Heap out-of-bounds write in BIO_f_linebuffer on short writes | 4.7 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-66471 | urllib3 Streaming API improperly handles highly compressed data | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-66418 | urllib3 allows an unbounded number of links in the decompression chain | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-66382 | libexpat Project libexpat: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-66200 | Apache HTTP Server: mod_userdir+suexec bypass via AllowOverride FileInfo | 5.4 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2025-66034 | fontTools is Vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write and XML injection in fontTools.varLib | 9.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-65082 | Apache HTTP Server: CGI environment variable override | 6.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-61729 | Go standard library Crypto/x509: security vulnerability | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-61725 | Excessive CPU consumption in ParseAddress in net/mail | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-61723 | Quadratic complexity when parsing some invalid inputs in encoding/pem | 7.5 | — |
| Low | CVE-2025-6170 | Libxml2: stack buffer overflow in xmllint interactive shell command handling | 2.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-6075 | Quadratic complexity in os.path.expandvars() with user-controlled template | 5.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-6021 | Libxml2: integer overflow in xmlbuildqname() leads to stack buffer overflow in libxml2 | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-59775 | Apache HTTP Server: NTLM Leakage on Windows through UNC SSRF | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-59375 | libexpat Project libexpat: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-58188 | Panic when validating certificates with DSA public keys in crypto/x509 | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-58187 | Quadratic complexity when checking name constraints in crypto/x509 | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-58098 | Apache HTTP Server: Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data | 8.3 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2025-55754 | Apache Tomcat: console manipulation via escape sequences in log messages | 9.6 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-55753 | Apache HTTP Server: mod_md (ACME), unintended retry intervals | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-55752 | Apache Tomcat: Directory traversal via rewrite with possible RCE if PUT is enabled | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-55668 | Apache Tomcat: session fixation via rewrite valve | 6.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-53864 | Connect2id Nimbus JOSE+JWT: Uncontrolled Recursion | 5.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-53506 | Apache Tomcat: DoS via excessive h2 streams at connection start | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-52520 | Apache Tomcat: DoS via integer overflow in multipart file upload | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-5245 | GNU Binutils objdump debug.c debug_type_samep memory corruption | 7.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-5244 | GNU Binutils ld elflink.c elf_gc_sweep memory corruption | 7.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-52434 | Apache Tomcat: APR/Native Connector crash leading to DoS | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-50181 | urllib3 redirects are not disabled when retries are disabled on PoolManager instantiation | 6.1 | — |
| Critical | CVE-2025-49796 | Libxml: type confusion leads to denial of service (dos) | 9.1 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-49795 | Libxml: null pointer dereference leads to denial of service (dos) | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-49125 | Apache Tomcat: Security constraint bypass for pre/post-resources | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-49124 | Apache Tomcat: exe side-loading via icalcs.exe in Tomcat installer for Windows | 8.4 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-48989 | Apache Tomcat: h2 DoS - Made You Reset | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-48988 | Apache Tomcat: FileUpload large number of parts with headers DoS | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-47273 | Pypa Setuptools: Path Traversal | 8.8 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-35036 | hibernate-validator insecure default Expression Language interpolation | 7.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-3198 | GNU Binutils objdump bucomm.c display_info memory leak | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-27723 | Intel(R) Ethernet 800 series: Use After Free | — | — |
| High | CVE-2025-24855 | XMLSoft libxslt: Use After Free | 7.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-15367 | POP3 command injection in user-controlled commands | — | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-15366 | IMAP command injection in user-controlled commands | — | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-15282 | Header injection via newlines in data URL mediatype | — | — |
| High | CVE-2025-15281 | wordexp with WRDE_REUSE and WRDE_APPEND may return uninitialized memory | 7.5 | — |
| Low | CVE-2025-15224 | libssh key passphrase bypass without agent set | 3.1 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-15079 | libssh global known_hosts override | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-14819 | OpenSSL partial chain store policy bypass | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-14524 | bearer token leak on cross-protocol redirect | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-14017 | broken TLS options for threaded LDAPS | 6.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-13837 | Out-of-memory when loading Plist | 5.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-13836 | Excessive read buffering DoS in http.client | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-1372 | GNU elfutils eu-readelf readelf.c print_string_section buffer overflow | 7.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-12781 | base64.b64decode() always accepts "+/" characters, despite setting altchars | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-12084 | Quadratic complexity in node ID cache clearing | 5.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-1182 | GNU Binutils ld elflink.c bfd_elf_reloc_symbol_deleted_p memory corruption | 5.0 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-1181 | GNU Binutils ld elflink.c _bfd_elf_gc_mark_rsec memory corruption | 5.0 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-1179 | GNU Binutils ld libbfd.c bfd_putl64 memory corruption | 7.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-1178 | GNU Binutils ld libbfd.c bfd_putl64 memory corruption | 5.6 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-1176 | GNU Binutils ld elflink.c _bfd_elf_gc_mark_rsec heap-based overflow | 5.0 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-11563 | wcurl path traversal with percent-encoded slashes | 4.6 | — |
| Low | CVE-2025-1149 | GNU Binutils ld xmalloc.c xstrdup memory leak | 3.1 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-11468 | Folding email comments of unfoldable characters doesn't preserve parenthesis | — | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-11414 | GNU Binutils Linker elflink.c get_link_hash_entry out-of-bounds | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-11413 | GNU Binutils Linker elflink.c elf_link_add_object_symbols out-of-bounds | 5.5 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-11412 | GNU Binutils Linker elflink.c bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry out-of-bounds | 5.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-11083 | GNU Binutils Linker elfcode.h elf_swap_shdr heap-based overflow | 7.8 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-10966 | missing SFTP host verification with wolfSSH | 4.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-10158 | Rsync: Out of bounds array access via negative index | 4.3 | — |
| Medium | CVE-2025-10148 | predictable WebSocket mask | 5.3 | — |
| High | CVE-2025-0840 | GNU Binutils objdump.c disassemble_bytes stack-based overflow | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2022-28948 | Yaml: Deserialization of Untrusted Data | 7.5 | — |
| High | CVE-2022-24903 | Buffer overflow in TCP syslog server (receiver) components in rsyslog | 8.1 | — |
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2025-46642"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2025-46642.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2025-46642 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>