Every applicability statement published about this vulnerability, kept as each source wrote it rather than merged into one verdict. Where sources disagree, both positions are shown.
A statement that names no version covers the whole product, which is not the same as your version falling inside a range. Orderings marked best effort come from schemes with no published comparison algorithm; exact ones follow a published specification.
Precedence decides which claim wins when two sources describe the same product over the same version range. It is a property of the source, not of the claim, and changing it re-ranks the data without re-reading a single document.
| Product | Status | Versions | Remediation | Source | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole | affected | <= e41c4b5bb691cea1f5b950d39518d8c404b5846e | none available | osv | |
| https://github.com/pi-hole/web | affected | <= 38d8e77f999ba5999c013b44f6e8fe808308de7a | none available | osv | |
| https://github.com/pi-hole/web | affected | < 62f2ffc8394ac67880424644246eff8697b8e7e1 | vendor fix → 62f2ffc8394ac67880424644246eff8697b8e7e1 | osv | |
| https://github.com/pi-hole/web | fixed | 62f2ffc8394ac67880424644246eff8697b8e7e1 | vendor fix → 62f2ffc8394ac67880424644246eff8697b8e7e1 | osv | |
| n/a/n/a n/a · n/a | affected | no version stated vendor label: all versions | none available | cve_cna |
A claim with no version range is shown as written rather than expanded: a government catalog naming only a vendor and product is a real statement at zero granularity, and inventing bounds for it would put precision in the record that the source never offered.