CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 161EXPL: 0CVE-2017-5664 – tomcat: Security constrained bypass in error page mechanism
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5664
The error page mechanism of the Java Servlet Specification requires that, when an error occurs and an error page is configured for the error that occurred, the original request and response are forwarded to the error page. This means that the request is presented to the error page with the original HTTP method. If the error page is a static file, expected behaviour is to serve content of the file as if processing a GET request, regardless of the actual HTTP method. The Default Servlet in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M20, 8.5.0 to 8.5.14, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.43 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.77 did not do this. Depending on the original request this could lead to unexpected and undesirable results for static error pages including, if the DefaultServlet is configured to permit writes, the replacement or removal of the custom error page. • http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3891 http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3892 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2017-3236626.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98888 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038641 https://access.redhat.com • CWE-266: Incorrect Privilege Assignment CWE-755: Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 205EXPL: 0CVE-2017-5647 – tomcat: Incorrect handling of pipelined requests when send file was used
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5647
A bug in the handling of the pipelined requests in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18, 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.42, 7.0.0 to 7.0.76, and 6.0.0 to 6.0.52, when send file was used, results in the pipelined request being lost when send file processing of the previous request completed. This could result in responses appearing to be sent for the wrong request. For example, a user agent that sent requests A, B and C could see the correct response for request A, the response for request C for request B and no response for request C. Un fallo en el manejo de las peticiones pipelinadas en Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M18, 8.5.0 a 8.5.12, 8.0.0.RC1 a 8.0.42, 7.0.0 a 7.0.76, Y 6.0.0 a 6.0.52, cuando se utilizó el archivo de envío, se pierde la solicitud de pipeline cuando se procesa el archivo de envío de la solicitud anterior completada. Esto podría resultar en respuestas que parecen ser enviadas para la solicitud incorrecta. • http://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/alert/HPESBHF03730.txt http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3842 http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3843 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2017-3236622.html http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038218 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1801 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1802 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2493 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2494 https://access.redhat&# • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 83%CPEs: 31EXPL: 0CVE-2017-5650
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5650
In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, the handling of an HTTP/2 GOAWAY frame for a connection did not close streams associated with that connection that were currently waiting for a WINDOW_UPDATE before allowing the application to write more data. These waiting streams each consumed a thread. A malicious client could therefore construct a series of HTTP/2 requests that would consume all available processing threads. En Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M18 y 8.5.0 a 8.5.12, el tratamiento de un marco HTTP/2 GOAWAY para una conexión que no cerró los flujos asociados con esa conexión que estaban esperando actualmente un WINDOW_UPDATE antes de permitir que la aplicación escriba más datos. Estos flujos de espera cada uno consumió un hilo. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2017-3236622.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97531 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038217 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6af47120905aa7d8fe12f42e8ff2284fb338ba141d3b77b8c7cb61b3%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/88855876c33f2f9c532ffb75bfee570ccf0b17ffa77493745af9a17a%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/th • CWE-404: Improper Resource Shutdown or Release •
CVSS: 9.1EPSS: 0%CPEs: 148EXPL: 0CVE-2017-5648 – tomcat: Calls to application listeners did not use the appropriate facade object
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5648
While investigating bug 60718, it was noticed that some calls to application listeners in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M17, 8.5.0 to 8.5.11, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.41, and 7.0.0 to 7.0.75 did not use the appropriate facade object. When running an untrusted application under a SecurityManager, it was therefore possible for that untrusted application to retain a reference to the request or response object and thereby access and/or modify information associated with another web application. Cuando se investigaba el error 60718, se observó que algunas llamadas a los oyentes de aplicaciones en Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M17, 8.5.0 a 8.5.11, 8.0.0.RC1 a 8.0.41 y 7.0. 0 a 7,0.75 no utilizó el objeto de fachada adecuado. Cuando se ejecutaba una aplicación no confiable bajo un SecurityManager, era posible, por tanto, que esa aplicación no fiable retuviese una referencia al objeto de solicitud o respuesta y, por lo tanto, acceder y / o modificar la información asociada con otra aplicación web. A vulnerability was discovered in tomcat. • http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3842 http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3843 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/07/20/8 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97530 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038220 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1801 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1802 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1809 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.or • CWE-668: Exposure of Resource to Wrong Sphere •
CVSS: 9.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 31EXPL: 0CVE-2017-5651
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5651
In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, the refactoring of the HTTP connectors introduced a regression in the send file processing. If the send file processing completed quickly, it was possible for the Processor to be added to the processor cache twice. This could result in the same Processor being used for multiple requests which in turn could lead to unexpected errors and/or response mix-up. En Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M18 y 8.5.0 a 8.5.12, la refactorización de los conectores HTTP introdujo una regresión en el procesamiento de archivos de envío. Si el procesamiento de archivos enviados se completó rápidamente, es posible que el Procesador se agregue a la caché del procesador dos veces. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2017-3236622.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97544 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038219 https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60918 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c0e00fd31efc11e147bf99d0f03c00a734447d3b131ab0818644cdb%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6694538826b87522fb723d2dcedd537e14ebe0a381d92e5525a531d8%40& •