CVSS: 7.1EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 1CVE-2019-5489 – Kernel: page cache side channel attacks
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2019-5489
The mincore() implementation in mm/mincore.c in the Linux kernel through 4.19.13 allowed local attackers to observe page cache access patterns of other processes on the same system, potentially allowing sniffing of secret information. (Fixing this affects the output of the fincore program.) Limited remote exploitation may be possible, as demonstrated by latency differences in accessing public files from an Apache HTTP Server. La implementación mincore() en mm/mincore.c en el kernel de Linux hasta la versión 4.19.13 permitía a los atacantes observar patrones de acceso a las páginas de caché de otros procesos en el mismo sistema, permitiendo el esnifado de información secreta. (Su arreglo afecta a la salida del programa fincore.) • https://github.com/mmxsrup/CVE-2019-5489 http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=574823bfab82d9d8fa47f422778043fbb4b4f50e http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-05/msg00071.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-06/msg00039.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-06/msg00048.html http://www.huawei.com/en/psirt/security-advisories/huawei-sa-20200115-01-pagecache-en http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106478 • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-319: Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 47EXPL: 0CVE-2018-0735 – Timing attack against ECDSA signature generation
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2018-0735
The OpenSSL ECDSA signature algorithm has been shown to be vulnerable to a timing side channel attack. An attacker could use variations in the signing algorithm to recover the private key. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0j (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0i). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1a (Affected 1.1.1). Se ha demostrado que el algoritmo de firmas ECDSA en OpenSSL es vulnerable a un ataque de sincronización de canal lateral. • http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/105750 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1041986 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3700 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=56fb454d281a023b3f950d969693553d3f3ceea1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=b1d6d55ece1c26fa2829e2b819b038d7b6d692b4 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/11/msg00024.html https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/november-2018-security-releases https://security.netapp.com/advisor • CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm CWE-385: Covert Timing Channel •
CVSS: 8.2EPSS: 0%CPEs: 182EXPL: 0CVE-2018-3627
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2018-3627
Logic bug in Intel Converged Security Management Engine 11.x may allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code via local privileged access. Un error de lógica en Intel Converged Security Management Engine 11.x podría permitir que un atacante ejecute código arbitrario mediante el acceso local privilegiado. • https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20190327-0006 https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00118.html •
CVSS: 9.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 27EXPL: 0CVE-2017-7657 – jetty: HTTP request smuggling
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-7657
In Eclipse Jetty, versions 9.2.x and older, 9.3.x (all configurations), and 9.4.x (non-default configuration with RFC2616 compliance enabled), transfer-encoding chunks are handled poorly. The chunk length parsing was vulnerable to an integer overflow. Thus a large chunk size could be interpreted as a smaller chunk size and content sent as chunk body could be interpreted as a pipelined request. If Jetty was deployed behind an intermediary that imposed some authorization and that intermediary allowed arbitrarily large chunks to be passed on unchanged, then this flaw could be used to bypass the authorization imposed by the intermediary as the fake pipelined request would not be interpreted by the intermediary as a request. En Eclipse Jetty, en versiones 9.2.x y anteriores, versiones 9.3.x (todas las configuraciones) y versiones 9.4.x (configuración personalizada con el cumplimiento RFC2616 habilitado), los fragmentos transfer-encoding se gestionan de forma incorrecta. • http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1041194 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:0910 https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=535668 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/053d9ce4d579b02203db18545fee5e33f35f2932885459b74d1e4272%40%3Cissues.activemq.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/708d94141126eac03011144a971a6411fcac16d9c248d1d535a39451%40%3Csolr-user.lucene.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9317fd092b257a0815434b116a8af8daea6e920b6673f4fd5583d5fe%40%3Ccommits.druid.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache. • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound CWE-444: Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 13%CPEs: 33EXPL: 0CVE-2017-3135 – Combination of DNS64 and RPZ Can Lead to Crash
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-3135
Under some conditions when using both DNS64 and RPZ to rewrite query responses, query processing can resume in an inconsistent state leading to either an INSIST assertion failure or an attempt to read through a NULL pointer. Affects BIND 9.8.8, 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.9.9-S7, 9.9.3 -> 9.9.9-P5, 9.9.10b1, 9.10.0 -> 9.10.4-P5, 9.10.5b1, 9.11.0 -> 9.11.0-P2, 9.11.1b1. En ciertas condiciones, al emplear DNS64 y RPZ para rescribir respuestas a consultas, el procesamiento de consultas puede continuar de forma inconsistente, lo que puede conducir a un fallo de aserción de INSIST o a un intento para leer a través de un puntero NULL. Afecta a BIND en su versión 9.8.8, desde la versión 9.9.3-S1 hasta la 9.9.9-S7, desde la versión 9.9.3 hasta la 9.9.9-P5, la versión 9.9.10b1, desde la versión 9.10.0 hasta la 9.10.4-P5, la versión 9.10.5b1, desde la versión 9.11.0 hasta la 9.11.0-P2 y a la versión 9.11.1b1. A denial of service flaw was found in the way BIND handled query responses when both DNS64 and RPZ were used. • http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0276.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/96150 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037801 https://h20566.www2.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docLocale=en_US&docId=emr_na-hpesbux03747en_us https://kb.isc.org/docs/aa-01453 https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/201708-01 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20180926-0005 https://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3795 https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-3135 https:/ • CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •