# GCVE corrections to upstream data?

**URL:** <https://discourse.ossbase.org/t/gcve-corrections-to-upstream-data/1099>\
**Category:** GCVE\
**Created:** [June 9, 2026, 10:08am UTC](https://discourse.ossbase.org/t/gcve-corrections-to-upstream-data/1099 "2026-06-09T10:08:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adulau](https://discourse.ossbase.org/user_avatar/discourse.ossbase.org/adulau/32/6_2.png) [@adulau](https://discourse.ossbase.org/u/adulau)\
**Post date:** [June 9, 2026, 9:38pm UTC](https://discourse.ossbase.org/t/gcve-corrections-to-upstream-data/1099/2 "2026-06-09T21:38:46Z")

</div>

Thanks for the feedback.

That’s actually a very good point. How to make a proposal for a CNA update. I see via the pull-request on the cvelistv5 repository but not sure if the CVE program will accept it. I might reach out to the CVE program to explain such case.

In the meantime, we introduced aliases which could at least solve the problem for the defenders to know all the products even the ones with typographic errors.

> **[GCVE - Product aliases](https://cpe.gcve.eu/aliases)**

If you see anything else, let us know. Thanks again for your contributions.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.ossbase.org/t/gcve-corrections-to-upstream-data/1099)._