<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-30T03:19:56.575000+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-9086</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-9086 — Out of bounds read for cookie path</title>
    <updated>2026-09-30T03:19:56.578693+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> curl, Siemens RUGGEDCOM RST2428P, Siemens SCALANCE XC-300/XR-300/XC-400/XR-500WG/XR-500 family, Siemens SCALANCE XCH328, Siemens SCALANCE XCM324, Siemens SCALANCE XCM328, Siemens SCALANCE XCM332, Siemens SCALANCE XRH334 (24 V DC, 8xFO, CC), Siemens SCALANCE XRM334 (230 V AC, 12xFO), Siemens SCALANCE XRM334 (230 V AC, 8xFO) and 7 more</p>
<p>1. A cookie is set using the `secure` keyword for `https://target`
2. curl is redirected to or otherwise made to speak with `http://target` (same
   hostname, but using clear text HTTP) using the same cookie set
3. The same cookie name is set - but with only a slash as path (`path="/"`).
   Since this site is not secure, the cookie *should* be ignored.
4. A bug in the path comparison logic makes curl read outside a heap buffer
   boundary</p>
<p>The bug either causes a crash or it potentially makes the comparison come to
the wrong conclusion and lets the clear-text site override the contents of the
secure cookie, contrary to expectations and depending on the memory contents
immediately following the single-byte allocation that holds the path.</p>
<p>The presumed and correct behavior would be to plainly ignore the second set of
the cookie since it was already set as secure on a secure host so overriding
it on an insecure host should not be okay.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-9086"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
