Page 2 of 36 results (0.007 seconds)

CVSS: 8.1EPSS: 17%CPEs: 52EXPL: 0

The Apache HTTP Server through 2.4.23 follows RFC 3875 section 4.1.18 and therefore does not protect applications from the presence of untrusted client data in the HTTP_PROXY environment variable, which might allow remote attackers to redirect an application's outbound HTTP traffic to an arbitrary proxy server via a crafted Proxy header in an HTTP request, aka an "httpoxy" issue. NOTE: the vendor states "This mitigation has been assigned the identifier CVE-2016-5387"; in other words, this is not a CVE ID for a vulnerability. El Apache HTTP Server hasta la versión 2.4.23 sigue a RFC 3875 sección 4.1.18 y por lo tanto no protege aplicaciones de la presencia de datos de clientes no confiables en ambiente variable de HTTP_PROXY, lo que puede permitir a atacantes remotos redireccionar el tráfico HTTP saliente de aplicación a un servidor proxy arbitrario a través de una cabecera Proxy manipulada en una petición HTTP, también conocido como problema "httpoxy". NOTA: el vendedor afirma "Se ha asignado a esta mitigación el identificador CVE-2016-5387"; en otras palabras, esto no es un CVE ID para una vulnerabilidad. It was discovered that httpd used the value of the Proxy header from HTTP requests to initialize the HTTP_PROXY environment variable for CGI scripts, which in turn was incorrectly used by certain HTTP client implementations to configure the proxy for outgoing HTTP requests. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2016-07/msg00059.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1624.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1625.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1648.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1649.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1650.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3623 http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/797896 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation •

CVSS: 8.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 47EXPL: 0

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: 5.8EPSS: 81%CPEs: 84EXPL: 2

The EPHEMERAL coder in ImageMagick before 6.9.3-10 and 7.x before 7.0.1-1 allows remote attackers to delete arbitrary files via a crafted image. El codificador EPHEMERAL en ImageMagick en versiones anteriores a 6.9.3-10 y 7.x en versiones anteriores a 7.0.1-1 permite a atacantes remotos eliminar archivos arbitrarios a través de una imagen manipulada. It was discovered that certain ImageMagick coders and pseudo-protocols did not properly prevent security sensitive operations when processing specially crafted images. A remote attacker could create a specially crafted image that, when processed by an application using ImageMagick or an unsuspecting user using the ImageMagick utilities, would allow the attacker to delete arbitrary files. ImageMagick contains an unspecified vulnerability that could allow users to delete files by using ImageMagick's 'ephemeral' pseudo protocol, which deletes files after reading. • 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-20: Improper Input Validation •

CVSS: 5.5EPSS: 93%CPEs: 84EXPL: 1

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) •

CVSS: 6.8EPSS: 1%CPEs: 37EXPL: 0

Buffer overflow in the Java Virtual Machine (JVM) in IBM SDK, Java Technology Edition 6 before SR16 FP25 (6.0.16.25), 6 R1 before SR8 FP25 (6.1.8.25), 7 before SR9 FP40 (7.0.9.40), 7 R1 before SR3 FP40 (7.1.3.40), and 8 before SR3 (8.0.3.0) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors. Desbordamiento de buffer en Java Virtual Machine (JVM) en IBM SDK, Java Technology Edition 6 en versiones anteriores a SR16 FP25 (6.0.16.25), 6 R1 en versiones anteriores a SR8 FP25 (6.1.8.25), 7 en versiones anteriores a SR9 FP40 (7.0.9.40), 7 R1 en versiones anteriores a SR3 FP40 (7.1.3.40) y 8 en versiones anteriores a SR3 (8.0.3.0) permite a atacantes remotos ejecutar código arbitrario a través de vectores no especificados. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00039.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00040.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00042.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00058.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00059.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00061.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05 • CWE-119: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer CWE-120: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') •