LibreOffice

Privacy-Focused Browser Tool Compresses PDFs Locally Without Uploading Sensitive Documents

A developer created a PDF compression tool that runs entirely inside the browser to protect sensitive personal and professional documents from third-party servers. The solution addresses repeated situations where embassy submissions, financial presentations, contracts, and internal reports exceeded size limits, forcing users to choose between installing desktop software or risking data exposure through online services. The tool reduces scanned and photographic PDFs by 66 to 97 percent depending on quality settings while honestly reporting weaker performance on text-heavy files compared with Ghostscript. It works on both desktop and mobile platforms, including iPhone and Android, requires no installation, and continues functioning offline after the first page load. On mobile devices the application respects memory constraints by limiting images to four megapixels, preserving readability for A4 documents intended for printing. The project originated from a single evening script built around Ghostscript and evolved into a full web application after similar compression needs recurred across multiple devices and locations.

LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice Flaw Enables Remote Code Execution via Malicious Calc Tables Without Macro Warnings

Researchers have demonstrated an attack against LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice users that executes arbitrary Java code simply by opening a malicious spreadsheet, without requiring macro permissions or triggering any security prompts. The vulnerability requires Java support to be enabled in the office suite and exploits legitimate features in the Calc component that automatically fetch data from external database sources. When a crafted document is opened, Calc loads a linked database file that references a malicious Java driver, allowing the attacker’s code to run inside the office process. LibreOffice has already patched the issue tracked as CVE-2026-63277 with the release of versions 26.2.5 and 26.8.0 on October 5, while Apache OpenOffice remains vulnerable up to version 4.1.16 under CVE-2026-59265 with a fix expected in 4.1.17. The attack chain works on both Windows and Linux and bypasses macro protections entirely because no user consent dialog appears. Although only a proof-of-concept exploit that launches the calculator has been published so far, the same technique can execute any Java payload. Users of OpenOffice are advised to disable Java or avoid untrusted files until the patch is available.

LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice Flaws Enable Remote Code Execution via Malicious Spreadsheets Without Macro Warnings

Two vulnerabilities, CVE-2026-63277 in LibreOffice Calc and CVE-2026-59265 in Apache OpenOffice, allow attackers to execute arbitrary code simply by tricking users into opening specially crafted spreadsheet files. The flaws exploit Java integration and class path handling, bypassing traditional macro security prompts entirely. LibreOffice has already released fixes in versions 26.2.5 and 26.8.0 that restrict class path entries to local file URLs only. Apache OpenOffice 4.1.16 and earlier remain vulnerable, with the stable patch expected in 4.1.17; interim mitigation requires disabling Java integration. The issues highlight risks in office suites that process untrusted documents containing external data connections or JDBC references. Organizations are advised to enforce least-privilege execution and avoid opening files from unknown sources until patches are applied.

Challenges in Building Accurate SBOMs for C and C++ Projects Highlighted by CodeScoring Analysis

C and C++ ecosystems lack centralized package manifests, making SBOM generation far more complex than in Python, Java, or JavaScript. Libraries may arrive through system package managers like apt or dnf, build tools such as Conan and vcpkg, or direct source inclusion, with no single record of all components. CodeScoring’s Johnny agent uses eBPF to observe linker commands during builds and cross-references results with dpkg, RPM, and pkg-config metadata. The analysis distinguishes build-time SBOMs, which capture static libraries and compilation commands, from runtime SBOMs that reflect dynamic dependencies at execution. When version data cannot be verified, components are explicitly marked unresolved rather than guessed. The approach also addresses header-only libraries and patched artifacts that defeat simple hash matching.