A XSS vulnerability was discovered in python-lxml's clean module. The module's parser didn't properly imitate browsers, which caused different behaviors between the sanitizer and the user's page. A remote attacker could exploit this flaw to run arbitrary HTML/JS code.

A flaw was found in PostgreSQL's "ALTER ... DEPENDS ON EXTENSION", where sub-commands did not perform authorization checks. An authenticated attacker could use this flaw in certain configurations to perform drop objects such as function, triggers, et al., leading to database corruption. This issue affects PostgreSQL versions before 12.2, before 11.7, before 10.12 and before 9.6.17.

The CGIHTTPServer module in Python 2.7.5 and 3.3.4 does not properly handle URLs in which URL encoding is used for path separators, which allows remote attackers to read script source code or conduct directory traversal attacks and execute unintended code via a crafted character sequence, as demonstrated by a %2f separator.

HTTP request smuggling in Node.js 10, 12, and 13 causes malicious payload delivery when transfer-encoding is malformed

Improper Certificate Validation in Node.js 10, 12, and 13 causes the process to abort when sending a crafted X.509 certificate

The mirroring support (-M, --use-mirrors) in Python Pip before 1.5 uses insecure DNS querying and authenticity checks which allows attackers to perform man-in-the-middle attacks.

An issue was discovered in Python through 2.7.16, 3.x through 3.5.7, 3.6.x through 3.6.9, and 3.7.x through 3.7.4. The email module wrongly parses email addresses that contain multiple @ characters. An application that uses the email module and implements some kind of checks on the From/To headers of a message could be tricked into accepting an email address that should be denied. An attack may be the same as in CVE-2019-11340; however, this CVE applies to Python more generally.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of headers with a 0-length header name and 0-length header value, optionally Huffman encoded into 1-byte or greater headers. Some implementations allocate memory for these headers and keep the allocation alive until the session dies. This can consume excess memory.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a reset flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens a number of streams and sends an invalid request over each stream that should solicit a stream of RST_STREAM frames from the peer. Depending on how the peer queues the RST_STREAM frames, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both.