CVSS: 9.1EPSS: 0%CPEs: 33EXPL: 1CVE-2016-5018 – tomcat: security manager bypass via IntrospectHelper utility function
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-5018
In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 a malicious web application was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via a Tomcat utility method that was accessible to web applications. En Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 a 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 a 8.0.36, 7.0.0 a 7.0.70, y 6.0.0 a 6.0.45 una aplicación web maliciosa era capaz de omitir un SecurityManager configurado mediante un método utility Tomcat accesible para las aplicaciones web. It was discovered that a malicious web application could bypass a configured SecurityManager via a Tomcat utility method that was accessible to web applications. • http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/155873/Tomcat-9.0.0.M1-Sandbox-Escape.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0457.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-1551.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3720 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93942 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037142 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038757 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0455 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0456 https://access.redhat.com/err •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 33EXPL: 0CVE-2016-0762 – tomcat: timing attack in Realm implementation
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-0762
The Realm implementations in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not process the supplied password if the supplied user name did not exist. This made a timing attack possible to determine valid user names. Note that the default configuration includes the LockOutRealm which makes exploitation of this vulnerability harder. Las implementaciones Realm en Apache Tomcat versiones 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 a 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 a 8.0.36, 7.0.0 a 7.0.70, y 6.0.0 a 6.0.45 no procesaban la contraseña proporcionada si el nombre de usuario proporcionado no existía. Esto hizo posible la realización de un ataque basado en tiempo para determinar nombres de usuario válidos. • http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0457.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3720 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93939 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037144 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0455 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0456 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2247 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1872f96bad43647832bdd84a408794cd06d9cbb557af63085ca10009%40%3Cannounce.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88e • CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 32EXPL: 0CVE-2016-6797 – tomcat: unrestricted access to global resources
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-6797
The ResourceLinkFactory implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not limit web application access to global JNDI resources to those resources explicitly linked to the web application. Therefore, it was possible for a web application to access any global JNDI resource whether an explicit ResourceLink had been configured or not. La implementación ResourceLinkFactory en Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 a 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 a 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 a 8.0.36, 7.0.0 a 7.0.70 a 6.0.0 a 6.0.45 no limitaba el acceso de las aplicaciones web a recursos globales JNDI a aquellos relacionados explícitamente con la aplicación web. Por lo tanto, era posible que una aplicación web accediese a cualquier recurso global JNDI sin importar si se había configurado un ResourceLink explícito. It was discovered that it was possible for a web application to access any global JNDI resource whether an explicit ResourceLink had been configured or not. • http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0457.html http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3720 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93940 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037145 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0455 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0456 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2247 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/37220405a377c0182d2afdb • CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 45EXPL: 1CVE-2016-2183 – SSL/TLS: Birthday attack against 64-bit block ciphers (SWEET32)
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-2183
The DES and Triple DES ciphers, as used in the TLS, SSH, and IPSec protocols and other protocols and products, have a birthday bound of approximately four billion blocks, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, as demonstrated by an HTTPS session using Triple DES in CBC mode, aka a "Sweet32" attack. Los cifrados DES y Triple DES, como se usan en los protocolos TLS, SSH e IPSec y otros protocolos y productos, tienen una cota de cumpleaños de aproximadamente cuatro mil millones de bloques, lo que facilita a atacantes remotos obtener datos de texto plano a través de un ataque de cumpleaños contra una sesión cifrada de larga duración, según lo demostrado por una sesión HTTPS usando Triple DES en modo CBC, también conocido como un ataque "Sweet32". A flaw was found in the way the DES/3DES cipher was used as part of the TLS/SSL protocol. A man-in-the-middle attacker could use this flaw to recover some plaintext data by capturing large amounts of encrypted traffic between TLS/SSL server and client if the communication used a DES/3DES based ciphersuite. IBM Informix Dynamic Server suffers from dll injection, PHP code injection, and heap buffer overflow vulnerabilities. • http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10759 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00022.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00023.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00024.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00005.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00011.h • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 1%CPEs: 9EXPL: 0CVE-2016-3110 – mod_cluster: remotely Segfault Apache http server
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-3110
mod_cluster, as used in Red Hat JBoss Web Server 2.1, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (Apache http server crash) via an MCMP message containing a series of = (equals) characters after a legitimate element. mod_cluster, tal como se utiliza en Red Hat JBoss Web Server 2.1, permite a atacantes remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (caída del servidor http de Apache) a través de un mensaje MCMP que contiene una serie de caracteres = (iguales) después de un elemento legítimo. It was discovered that it is possible to remotely Segfault Apache http server with a specially crafted string sent to the mod_cluster via service messages (MCMP). • 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://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2054.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2055.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2056.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92584 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326320 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org&#x • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation •