| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
|
Dell VxRail, versions prior to 7.0.450, contain an improper certificate validation vulnerability. A high privileged remote attacker may potentially exploit this vulnerability to carry out a man-in-the-middle attack by supplying a crafted certificate and intercepting the victim's traffic to view or modify a victim’s data in transit.
|
| light-oauth2 before version 2.1.27 obtains the public key without any verification. This could allow attackers to authenticate to the application with a crafted JWT token. |
| It was discovered that when acting as TLS clients, Beats, Elastic Agent, APM Server, and Fleet Server did not verify whether the server certificate is valid for the target IP address; however, certificate signature validation is still performed. More specifically, when the client is configured to connect to an IP address (instead of a hostname) it does not validate the server certificate's IP SAN values against that IP address and certificate validation fails, and therefore the connection is not blocked as expected. |
| DroneScout ds230 Remote ID receiver from BlueMark Innovations is affected by an Improper Authentication vulnerability during the firmware update procedure.
Specifically, the firmware update procedure ignores and does not check the validity of the TLS certificate of the HTTPS endpoint from which the firmware update package (.tar.bz2 file) is downloaded.
An attacker with the ability to put himself in a Man-in-the-Middle situation (e.g., DNS poisoning, ARP poisoning, control of a node on the route to the endpoint, etc.) can trick the DroneScout ds230 to install a crafted malicious firmware update containing arbitrary files (e.g., executable and configuration) and gain administrative (root) privileges on the underlying Linux operating system.
This issue affects DroneScout ds230 firmware from version 20211210-1627 through 20230329-1042. |
| The foundry campaigns service was found to be vulnerable to an unauthenticated information disclosure in a rest endpoint |
| A remote authentication bypass issue exists in some
OneView APIs.
|
| Improper Certificate Validation in Samsung Email prior to version 6.1.82.0 allows remote attacker to intercept the network traffic including sensitive information. |
| An information disclosure vulnerability in 4D SAS 4D Server Application v17, v18, v19 R7 and earlier allows attackers to retrieve password hashes for all users via eavesdropping. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. A Keycloak server configured to support mTLS authentication for OAuth/OpenID clients does not properly verify the client certificate chain. A client that possesses a proper certificate can authorize itself as any other client, therefore, access data that belongs to other clients. |
| An authentication bypass by spoofing of a device with a synthetic IP address is possible in Zscaler Client Connector on Windows, allowing a functionality bypass. This issue affects Client Connector: before 3.9.
|
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC IPC1047 (All versions), SIMATIC IPC1047E (All versions with maxView Storage Manager < 4.09.00.25611 on Windows), SIMATIC IPC647D (All versions), SIMATIC IPC647E (All versions with maxView Storage Manager < 4.09.00.25611 on Windows), SIMATIC IPC847D (All versions), SIMATIC IPC847E (All versions with maxView Storage Manager < 4.09.00.25611 on Windows). The Adaptec Maxview application on affected devices is using a non-unique TLS certificate across installations to protect the communication from the local browser to the local application.
A local attacker may use this key to decrypt intercepted local traffic between the browser and the application and could perform a man-in-the-middle attack in order to modify data in transit. |
| A misconfiguration vulnerability exists in the urvpn_client functionality of Milesight UR32L v32.3.0.5. A specially-crafted man-in-the-middle attack can lead to increased privileges. An attacker can perform a man-in-the-middle attack to trigger this vulnerability. |
| An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiAnalyzer and FortiManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, 6.4.8 through 6.4.10 may allow a remote and unauthenticated attacker to perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack on the communication channel between the device and the remote FortiGuard server hosting outbreakalert ressources. |
| Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. Parse Server uses the request header `x-forwarded-for` to determine the client IP address. If Parse Server doesn't run behind a proxy server, then a client can set this header and Parse Server will trust the value of the header. The incorrect client IP address will be used by various features in Parse Server. This allows to circumvent the security mechanism of the Parse Server option `masterKeyIps` by setting an allowed IP address as the `x-forwarded-for` header value. This issue has been patched in version 5.4.1. The mechanism to determine the client IP address has been rewritten. The correct IP address determination now requires to set the Parse Server option `trustProxy`. |
| In multiple locations, there are root CA certificates which need to be disabled. This could lead to remote information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
|
| A malicious actor that has been granted Guest Operation Privileges https://docs.vmware.com/en/VMware-vSphere/8.0/vsphere-security/GUID-6A952214-0E5E-4CCF-9D2A-90948FF643EC.html in a target virtual machine may be able to elevate their privileges if that target virtual machine has been assigned a more privileged Guest Alias https://vdc-download.vmware.com/vmwb-repository/dcr-public/d1902b0e-d479-46bf-8ac9-cee0e31e8ec0/07ce8dbd-db48-4261-9b8f-c6d3ad8ba472/vim.vm.guest.AliasManager.html . |
| Multiple Cisco products are affected by a vulnerability in Snort access control policies that could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass the configured policies on an affected system.
This vulnerability is due to a logic error that occurs when the access control policies are being populated. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by establishing a connection to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass configured access control rules on the affected system. |
| Multiple vulnerabilities in the per-user-override feature of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software and Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass a configured access control list (ACL) and allow traffic that should be denied to flow through an affected device. These vulnerabilities are due to a logic error that could occur when the affected software constructs and applies per-user-override rules. An attacker could exploit these vulnerabilities by connecting to a network through an affected device that has a vulnerable configuration. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass the interface ACL and access resources that would should be protected. |
| A vulnerability in the offline access mode of Cisco Duo Two-Factor Authentication for macOS and Duo Authentication for Windows Logon and RDP could allow an unauthenticated, physical attacker to replay valid user session credentials and gain unauthorized access to an affected macOS or Windows device. This vulnerability exists because session credentials do not properly expire. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by replaying previously used multifactor authentication (MFA) codes to bypass MFA protection. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to gain unauthorized access to the affected device. |
| A vulnerability exists in the component RTU500 Scripting interface. When a client connects to a server using TLS, the server presents a certificate. This certificate links a public key to the identity of the service and is signed by a Certification Authority (CA), allowing the client to validate that the remote service can be trusted and is not malicious. If the client does not validate the parameters of the certificate, then attackers could be able to spoof the identity of the service. An attacker could exploit the vulnerability by using faking the identity of a RTU500 device and intercepting the messages initiated via the RTU500 Scripting interface. |
