Page 13 of 137 results (0.014 seconds)

CVSS: 9.0EPSS: 0%CPEs: 28EXPL: 0

An attacker that is able to modify Velocity templates may execute arbitrary Java code or run arbitrary system commands with the same privileges as the account running the Servlet container. This applies to applications that allow untrusted users to upload/modify velocity templates running Apache Velocity Engine versions up to 2.2. Un atacante que es capaz de modificar las plantillas de Velocity puede ejecutar código Java arbitrario o ejecutar comandos de sistema arbitrarios con los mismos privilegios que la cuenta que ejecuta el contenedor Servlet. Esto se aplica a las aplicaciones que permiten a usuarios no confiables cargar y modificar plantillas de velocidad que ejecutan versiones de Apache Velocity Engine versiones hasta la 2.2 A flaw was found in velocity. An attacker, able to modify Velocity templates, may execute arbitrary Java code or run arbitrary system commands with the same privileges as the account running the Servlet container. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/10/1 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r01043f584cbd47959fabe18fff64de940f81a65024bb8dddbda31d9a%40%3Cuser.velocity.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0bc98e9cd080b4a13b905c571b9bed87e1a0878d44dbf21487c6cca4%40%3Cdev.santuario.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r17cb932fab14801b14e5b97a7f05192f4f366ef260c10d4a8dba8ac9%40%3Cdev.ws.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r293284c6806c73f51098001ea86a14271c39f72cd76af9e946d9d9ad%40%3Cdev.ws.apache.org%3E https://lists • CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') •

CVSS: 8.2EPSS: 0%CPEs: 37EXPL: 0

Apache Batik 1.13 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery, caused by improper input validation by the NodePickerPanel. By using a specially-crafted argument, an attacker could exploit this vulnerability to cause the underlying server to make arbitrary GET requests. Apache Batik versión 1.13 es vulnerable a un ataque de tipo server-side request forgery, causada por una comprobación de entrada inapropiada por parte de NodePickerPanel. Al usar un argumento especialmente diseñado, un atacante podría explotar esta vulnerabilidad para causar que el servidor subyacente lleve a cabo peticiones GET arbitrarias • https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r2877ae10e8be56a3c52d03e373512ddd32f16b863f24c2e22f5a5ba2%40%3Cdev.poi.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r588d05a0790b40a0eb81088252e1e8c1efb99706631421f17038eb05%40%3Cdev.poi.apache.org%3E https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/10/msg00021.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/JEDID4DAVPECE6O4QQCSIS75BLLBUUAM https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/W7EAYO5XIHD6OIEA3HPK64UDDBSLNAC5 https: • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) •

CVSS: 9.0EPSS: 0%CPEs: 11EXPL: 0

Spring Security 5.4.x prior to 5.4.4, 5.3.x prior to 5.3.8.RELEASE, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.9.RELEASE, and older unsupported versions can fail to save the SecurityContext if it is changed more than once in a single request.A malicious user cannot cause the bug to happen (it must be programmed in). However, if the application's intent is to only allow the user to run with elevated privileges in a small portion of the application, the bug can be leveraged to extend those privileges to the rest of the application. Spring Security versiones 5.4.x anteriores a 5.4.4, versiones 5.3.x anteriores a 5.3.8.RELEASE, versiones 5.2.x anteriores a 5.2.9.RELEASE, y versiones anteriores no compatibles, pueden producir un fallo al guardar el SecurityContext si se cambia más de una vez en una sola petición. Un usuario malicioso no puede causar el error (debe estar programado). Sin embargo, si la intención de la aplicación es sólo permitir que el usuario solo se ejecute con privilegios elevados en una pequeña parte de la aplicación, el error puede ser aprovechado para extender esos privilegios al resto de la aplicación • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/02/19/7 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r163b3e4e39803882f5be05ee8606b2b9812920e196daa2a82997ce14%40%3Cpluto-dev.portals.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r2cb05e499807900ba23e539643eead9c5f0652fd271f223f89da1804%40%3Cpluto-scm.portals.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r37423ec7eea340e92a409452c35b649dce02fdc467f0b3f52086c177%40%3Cpluto-dev.portals.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3868207b967f926819fe3aa8d33f1666429be589bb4a62104a49f4e3%40%3Cpluto-dev.portals.apache. •

CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 38EXPL: 0

The OpenSSL public API function X509_issuer_and_serial_hash() attempts to create a unique hash value based on the issuer and serial number data contained within an X509 certificate. However it fails to correctly handle any errors that may occur while parsing the issuer field (which might occur if the issuer field is maliciously constructed). This may subsequently result in a NULL pointer deref and a crash leading to a potential denial of service attack. The function X509_issuer_and_serial_hash() is never directly called by OpenSSL itself so applications are only vulnerable if they use this function directly and they use it on certificates that may have been obtained from untrusted sources. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1i and below are affected by this issue. • http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/67 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/68 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/70 https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-637483.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=122a19ab48091c657f7cb1fb3af9fc07bd557bbf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=8252ee4d90f3f2004d3d0aeeed003ad49c9a7807 https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44846 https://security.gentoo.org/gls • CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 67EXPL: 0

Calls to EVP_CipherUpdate, EVP_EncryptUpdate and EVP_DecryptUpdate may overflow the output length argument in some cases where the input length is close to the maximum permissable length for an integer on the platform. In such cases the return value from the function call will be 1 (indicating success), but the output length value will be negative. This could cause applications to behave incorrectly or crash. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1i and below are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1j. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-389290.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=6a51b9e1d0cf0bf8515f7201b68fb0a3482b3dc1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=9b1129239f3ebb1d1c98ce9ed41d5c9476c47cb2 https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44846 https://kc.mcafee.com/corporate/index?page=content&id=SB10366 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r58af02e294bd07f487e2c64ffc0a29b837db5600e33b6e698b9d696b%40%3Cissues.bookkeeper.apache.org%3E https:/ • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound •