CVSS: 4.6EPSS: 0%CPEs: 130EXPL: 0CVE-2006-0485
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2006-0485
The TCL shell in Cisco IOS 12.2(14)S before 12.2(14)S16, 12.2(18)S before 12.2(18)S11, and certain other releases before 25 January 2006 does not perform Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA) command authorization checks, which may allow local users to execute IOS EXEC commands that were prohibited via the AAA configuration, aka Bug ID CSCeh73049. • http://secunia.com/advisories/18613 http://securitytracker.com/id?1015543 http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-response-20060125-aaatcl.shtml http://www.osvdb.org/34892 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/16383 http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2006/0337 https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/24308 https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A5836 •
CVSS: 7.1EPSS: 3%CPEs: 108EXPL: 0CVE-2006-0340
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2006-0340
Unspecified vulnerability in Stack Group Bidding Protocol (SGBP) support in Cisco IOS 12.0 through 12.4 running on various Cisco products, when SGBP is enabled, allows remote attackers on the local network to cause a denial of service (device hang and network traffic loss) via a crafted UDP packet to port 9900. • http://secunia.com/advisories/18490 http://securityreason.com/securityalert/358 http://securitytracker.com/id?1015501 http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20060118-sgbp.shtml http://www.osvdb.org/22624 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/16303 http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2006/0248 https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/24182 • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation •
CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 167EXPL: 1CVE-2005-4258
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2005-4258
Unspecified Cisco Catalyst Switches allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device crash) via an IP packet with the same source and destination IPs and ports, and with the SYN flag set (aka LanD). NOTE: the provenance of this issue is unknown; the details are obtained solely from the BID. Conmutadores Cisco Catalyst no especificados permiten a atacantes remotos causar una denegación de servicio (caída de dispositivo) mediante un paquete IP con IPs y puertos de origen y destino iguales y con la bandera SYN. (tcc LanD). NOTA: La proveniencia de esta cuestión es desconocida; los detalles son obtenidos exclusivamente de BID. • http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15864 https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/44543 •
CVSS: 2.6EPSS: 5%CPEs: 225EXPL: 2CVE-2005-3921
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2005-3921
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco IOS Web Server for IOS 12.0(2a) allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML by (1) packets containing HTML that an administrator views via an HTTP interface to the contents of memory buffers, as demonstrated by the URI /level/15/exec/-/buffers/assigned/dump; or (2) sending the router Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) packets with HTML payload that an administrator views via the CDP status pages. NOTE: these vectors were originally reported as being associated with the dump and packet options in /level/15/exec/-/show/buffers. • http://secunia.com/advisories/17780 http://secunia.com/advisories/18528 http://securityreason.com/securityalert/227 http://securitytracker.com/id?1015275 http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20051201-http.shtml http://www.idefense.com/intelligence/vulnerabilities/display.php?id=372 http://www.infohacking.com/INFOHACKING_RESEARCH/Our_Advisories/cisco/index.html http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/417916/100/0/threaded http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15602 http://www.securit •
CVSS: 9.3EPSS: 5%CPEs: 228EXPL: 0CVE-2005-3481
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2005-3481
Cisco IOS 12.0 to 12.4 might allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a heap-based buffer overflow in system timers. NOTE: this issue does not correspond to a specific vulnerability, rather a general weakness that only increases the feasibility of exploitation of any vulnerabilities that might exist. Such design-level weaknesses normally are not included in CVE, so perhaps this issue should be REJECTed. • http://secunia.com/advisories/17413 http://securitytracker.com/id?1015139 http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20051102-timers.shtml http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/562945 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15275 http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2005/2282 https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A4914 •