CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 3%CPEs: 148EXPL: 0CVE-2016-4556 – squid: SIGSEGV in ESIContext response handling
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-4556
Double free vulnerability in Esi.cc in Squid 3.x before 3.5.18 and 4.x before 4.0.10 allows remote servers to cause a denial of service (crash) via a crafted Edge Side Includes (ESI) response. Vulnerabilidad de liberación doble de memoria en Esi.cc en Squid 3.x en versiones anteriores a 3.5.18 y 4.x en versiones anteriores a 4.0.10 permite a servidores remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (caída) a través de una respuesta Edge Side Includes (ESI) manipulada. An incorrect reference counting flaw was found in the way Squid processes ESI responses. If Squid is configured as reverse-proxy, for TLS/HTTPS interception, an attacker controlling a server accessed by Squid, could crash the squid worker, causing a Denial of Service attack. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00010.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00040.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2016-08/msg00069.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3625 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/05/06/3 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/05/06/5 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/linuxbulletinapr2016-2952096.html http://www.securitytracker.com/ • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation •
CVSS: 8.6EPSS: 0%CPEs: 7EXPL: 0CVE-2016-4554 – squid: Header Smuggling issue in HTTP Request processing
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-4554
mime_header.cc in Squid before 3.5.18 allows remote attackers to bypass intended same-origin restrictions and possibly conduct cache-poisoning attacks via a crafted HTTP Host header, aka a "header smuggling" issue. mime_header.cc en Squid en versiones anteriores a 3.5.18 permite a atacantes remotos eludir restricciones destinadas al mismo origen y posiblemente llevar a cabo ataques de envenenamiento de caché a través de una cabecera HTTP Host manipulada, también conocido como un problema "contrabando de peticiones". An input validation flaw was found in Squid's mime_get_header_field() function, which is used to search for headers within HTTP requests. An attacker could send an HTTP request from the client side with specially crafted header Host header that bypasses same-origin security protections, causing Squid operating as interception or reverse-proxy to contact the wrong origin server. It could also be used for cache poisoning for client not following RFC 7230. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00010.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00040.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2016-08/msg00069.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3625 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/linuxbulletinapr2016-2952096.html http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1035769 http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2016_8.txt http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.1/changesets&# • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 3%CPEs: 148EXPL: 1CVE-2016-4555 – squid: SegFault from ESIInclude::Start
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-4555
client_side_request.cc in Squid 3.x before 3.5.18 and 4.x before 4.0.10 allows remote servers to cause a denial of service (crash) via crafted Edge Side Includes (ESI) responses. client_side_request.cc en Squid 3.x en versiones anteriores a 3.5.18 y 4.x en versiones anteriores a 4.0.10 permite a servidores remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (caída) a través de respuestas Edge Side Includes (ESI) manipuladas. A NULL pointer dereference flaw was found in the way Squid processes ESI responses. If Squid was used as a reverse proxy or for TLS/HTTPS interception, a malicious server could use this flaw to crash the Squid worker process. • http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4455 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00010.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-08/msg00040.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2016-08/msg00069.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3625 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/05/06/3 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/05/06/5 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/linu • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •
CVSS: 8.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 47EXPL: 0CVE-2016-3710 – qemu: incorrect banked access bounds checking in vga module
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-3710
The VGA module in QEMU improperly performs bounds checking on banked access to video memory, which allows local guest OS administrators to execute arbitrary code on the host by changing access modes after setting the bank register, aka the "Dark Portal" issue. El módulo VGA en QEMU lleva a cabo incorrectamente comprobaciones de límites sobre acceso almacenado a la memoria de vídeo, lo que permite a administradores locales de SO invitado ejecutar código arbitrario sobre el anfitrión cambiando los modos de acceso después de establecer el banco de registros, también conocido como el problema "Dark Portal". An out-of-bounds read/write access flaw was found in the way QEMU's VGA emulation with VESA BIOS Extensions (VBE) support performed read/write operations using I/O port methods. A privileged guest user could use this flaw to execute arbitrary code on the host with the privileges of the host's QEMU process. • http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0724.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0725.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0997.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0999.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1000.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1001.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1002.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1019.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1943.html http://suppor • CWE-119: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer •
CVSS: 5.5EPSS: 93%CPEs: 84EXPL: 1CVE-2016-3718 – ImageMagick Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-3718
The (1) HTTP and (2) FTP coders in ImageMagick before 6.9.3-10 and 7.x before 7.0.1-1 allow remote attackers to conduct server-side request forgery (SSRF) attacks via a crafted image. Los codificadores (1) HTTP y (2) FTP en ImageMagick en versiones anteriores a 6.9.3-10 y 7.x en versiones anteriores a 7.0.1-1 permiten a atacantes remotos llevar a cabo ataques de falsificación de peticiones del lado del servidor (SSRF) a través de una imagen manipulada. A server-side request forgery flaw was discovered in the way ImageMagick processed certain images. A remote attacker could exploit this flaw to mislead an application using ImageMagick or an unsuspecting user using the ImageMagick utilities into, for example, performing HTTP(S) requests or opening FTP sessions via specially crafted images. ImageMagick contains an unspecified vulnerability that allows attackers to perform server-side request forgery (SSRF) via a crafted image. • https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/39767 http://git.imagemagick.org/repos/ImageMagick/blob/a01518e08c840577cabd7d3ff291a9ba735f7276/ChangeLog http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00024.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00025.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00028.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00032.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00051.html http&# • CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) •