CVEs.

Vulnerabilities published in the last two years in software made by the companies on the wall: clients, SDKs, agents and self-hosted editions. A CVE here does not mean the hosted service was affected or breached.

NVD data refreshed 2 h ago

Severity of matching CVEs

CVSS base severity, as scored in NVD

Critical
00%
High
00%
Medium
6100%
Low or not scored
00%
Matching CVEs
6
Last two years
Critical
0
CVSS 9.0 and above
High
0
CVSS 7.0 to 8.9
Known exploited
0
On CISA's KEV list

Matching CVEs published

By month, last two years

Peak 2 · October 2026

  • Total: 6
  • December 2024: 0
  • January 2025: 0
  • February 2025: 0
  • March 2025: 0
  • April 2025: 0
  • May 2025: 0
  • June 2025: 0
  • July 2025: 0
  • August 2025: 0
  • September 2025: 1
  • October 2025: 0
  • November 2025: 0
  • December 2025: 1
  • January 2026: 0
  • February 2026: 0
  • March 2026: 0
  • April 2026: 1
  • May 2026: 0
  • June 2026: 0
  • July 2026: 0
  • August 2026: 0
  • September 2026: 0
  • October 2026: 2
  • November 2026: 1

Most CVEs

In each company's software, last two years

  1. Microsoft 365990
  2. NVIDIA590
  3. GitLab436
  4. Apple (iCloud, App Store and services)348
  5. MongoDB Atlas320
  6. Mattermost Cloud310

Matching CVEs

  1. 5.3Med

    CVE-2026-87857 (opens in a new tab)

    Temporal Server does not bind a workflow-history pagination token to the namespace and workflow named in the request that presents it. GetWorkflowExecutionHistory and GetWorkflowExecutionHistoryReverse authorize the caller against the namespace in the request, then select history from the branch recorded inside the caller-supplied next_page_token. The normal history continuation carries a run identifier, event bounds, a persistence cursor, and a branch token, but no namespace or workflow identity, and it is serialized as unauthenticated protobuf bytes. An authenticated caller holding read perm

    Temporal Cloud· Nov 9, 2026

  2. 6.0Med

    CVE-2026-108126 (opens in a new tab)

    temporal-proxy 0.2.0 through 0.8.0 does not bind encrypted payloads to the namespace they were encrypted for. When payload encryption is enabled, the proxy chooses the decryption key by an identifier stored in the payload rather than by the namespace of the request, and nothing in the ciphertext records that namespace. A caller whom the proxy authorizes only for namespace B, and who has obtained an encrypted payload from namespace A, can therefore have the proxy decrypt it. In 0.8.0, the caller can submit the payload to the codec server's /decode endpoint. In every affected version, a caller w

    Temporal Cloud· Oct 15, 2026

  3. 6.0Med

    CVE-2026-89140 (opens in a new tab)

    Temporal Server does not bind internal completion callbacks to the namespace that attached them, which allows an authenticated caller with write permission in one namespace to alter Scheduler V2 schedule state in another namespace. The callback address temporal://internal is reserved for callbacks that Scheduler V2 attaches to the Workflows it starts. In affected releases, any authenticated caller could attach a callback with that address to a Workflow start request, the address was exempt from the component.callbacks.allowedAddresses allowlist, and the History service delivered the callback t

    Temporal Cloud· Oct 12, 2026

  4. 6.3Med

    CVE-2026-5724 (opens in a new tab)

    The frontend gRPC server's streaming interceptor chain did not include the authorization interceptor. When a ClaimMapper and Authorizer are configured, unary RPCs enforce authentication and authorization, but the streaming AdminService/StreamWorkflowReplicationMessages endpoint accepted requests without credentials. This endpoint is registered on the same port as WorkflowService and cannot be disabled independently. An attacker with network access to the frontend port could open the replication stream without authentication. Data exfiltration is possible, but only when a configured replication

    Temporal Cloud· Apr 10, 2026

  5. 5.3Med

    CVE-2025-14987 (opens in a new tab)

    When system.enableCrossNamespaceCommands is enabled (on by default), the Temporal server permits certain workflow task commands (e.g. StartChildWorkflowExecution, SignalExternalWorkflowExecution, RequestCancelExternalWorkflowExecution) to target a different namespace than the namespace authorized at the gRPC boundary. The frontend authorizes RespondWorkflowTaskCompleted based on the outer request namespace, but the history service later resolves and executes the command using the namespace embedded in command attributes without authorizing the caller for that target namespace. This can allow a

    Temporal Cloud· Dec 30, 2025

  6. 6.9Med

    CVE-2025-8396 (opens in a new tab)

    Insufficiently specific bounds checking on authorization header could lead to denial of service in the Temporal server on all platforms due to excessive memory allocation.This issue affects all platforms and versions of OSS Server prior to 1.26.3, 1.27.3, and 1.28.1 (i.e., fixed in 1.26.3, 1.27.3, and 1.28.1 and later). Temporal Cloud services are not impacted.

    Temporal Cloud· Sep 15, 2025

Public information only

Everything on this page was already published by the companies themselves or by public bodies. statuswall gathers it in one place, links every item to its original, and adds nothing from private or leaked sources.

Sources

How fresh it is

  • New and changed CVEs: pulled from NVD every two hours; last run 2 h ago
  • Known-exploited flags: updated from CISA in the same run
  • Window: the last two years; older entries drop off automatically

Source: the U.S. National Vulnerability Database, refreshed daily, with the known-exploited flag from CISA's KEV catalog. Descriptions are NVD's. A CVE is listed under a company when NVD names that company's product as affected, or when the company's own CVE authority assigned it; companies whose names are common words are matched only by explicit rules, so some CVEs will be missing. This product uses NVD data but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD. CVE is a registered trademark of The MITRE Corporation.

statuswall is independent and is not affiliated with, sponsored by or endorsed by any company named here. Company and product names are used only to identify whose public information is being referred to. The information is provided as is, for general reference, with no guarantee that it is complete, current or free of error; it is not security, legal or purchasing advice. Where this page and an official source differ, the official source is right.