CVSS: 7.2EPSS: 1%CPEs: 6EXPL: 3CVE-2020-7712 – Command Injection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2020-7712
This affects the package json before 10.0.0. It is possible to inject arbritary commands using the parseLookup function. Esto afecta al paquete json versiones anteriores a 10.0.0. Es posible inyectar comandos arbitrarios usando la función parseLookup • https://github.com/trentm/json/issues/144 https://github.com/trentm/json/pull/145 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r37c0e1807da7ff2bdd028bbe296465a6bbb99e2320dbe661d5d8b33b%40%3Cissues.zookeeper.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3b04f4e99a19613f88ae088aa18cd271231a3c79dfff8f5efa8cda61%40%3Cissues.zookeeper.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r5f17bfca1d6e7f4b33ae978725b2fd62a9f1b3111696eafa9add802d%40%3Cissues.zookeeper.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r8d2e174230f6d26e16c007546e804c343f1f68956f526daaafa4aaae%40%3Cdev&# • CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 52EXPL: 1CVE-2020-5397 – CSRF Attack via CORS Preflight Requests with Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2020-5397
Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3 are vulnerable to CSRF attacks through CORS preflight requests that target Spring MVC (spring-webmvc module) or Spring WebFlux (spring-webflux module) endpoints. Only non-authenticated endpoints are vulnerable because preflight requests should not include credentials and therefore requests should fail authentication. However a notable exception to this are Chrome based browsers when using client certificates for authentication since Chrome sends TLS client certificates in CORS preflight requests in violation of spec requirements. No HTTP body can be sent or received as a result of this attack. Spring Framework, versiones 5.2.x anteriores a 5.2.3 son vulnerables a los ataques de tipo CSRF por medio de peticiones de verificación previa CORS que van dirigidas a los endpoints Spring MVC (módulo spring-webmvc) o Spring WebFlux (módulo spring-webflux). • https://pivotal.io/security/cve-2020-5397 https://www.oracle.com//security-alerts/cpujul2021.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuapr2020.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2020.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2022.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2020.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2021.html • CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) •
CVSS: 8.0EPSS: 62%CPEs: 63EXPL: 1CVE-2020-5398 – RFD Attack via "Content-Disposition" Header Sourced from Request Input by Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux Application
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2020-5398
In Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3, versions 5.1.x prior to 5.1.13, and versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a "Content-Disposition" header in the response where the filename attribute is derived from user supplied input. En Spring Framework, versiones 5.2.x anteriores a 5.2.3, versiones 5.1.x anteriores a 5.1.13 y versiones 5.0.x anteriores a 5.0.16, una aplicación es vulnerable a un ataque de tipo reflected file download (RFD) cuando se establece un encabezado "Content-Disposition" en la respuesta donde el atributo filename es derivado de la entrada suministrada por el usuario. A flaw was found in springframework in versions prior to 5.0.16, 5.1.13, and 5.2.3. A reflected file download (RFD) attack is possible when a "Content-Disposition" header is set in response to where the filename attribute is derived from user supplied input. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity as well as system availability. • https://github.com/motikan2010/CVE-2020-5398 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r028977b9b9d44a89823639aa3296fb0f0cfdd76b4450df89d3c4fbbf%40%3Cissues.karaf.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0f2d0ae1bad2edb3d4a863d77f3097b5e88cfbdae7b809f4f42d6aad%40%3Cissues.karaf.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0f3530f7cb510036e497532ffc4e0bd0b882940448cf4e233994b08b%40%3Ccommits.karaf.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1accbd4f31ad2f40e1661d70a4510a584eb3efd1e32e8660ccf46676%40%3Ccommits.karaf.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org&#x • CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') CWE-494: Download of Code Without Integrity Check •
CVSS: 9.8EPSS: 87%CPEs: 174EXPL: 1CVE-2017-5645 – log4j: Socket receiver deserialization vulnerability
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-5645
In Apache Log4j 2.x before 2.8.2, when using the TCP socket server or UDP socket server to receive serialized log events from another application, a specially crafted binary payload can be sent that, when deserialized, can execute arbitrary code. En Apache Log4j 2.x en versiones anteriores a 2.8.2, cuando se utiliza el servidor de socket TCP o el servidor de socket UDP para recibir sucesos de registro serializados de otra aplicación, puede enviarse una carga binaria especialmente diseñada que, cuando se deserializa, puede ejecutar código arbitrario. It was found that when using remote logging with log4j socket server the log4j server would deserialize any log event received via TCP or UDP. An attacker could use this flaw to send a specially crafted log event that, during deserialization, would execute arbitrary code in the context of the logger application. • https://github.com/pimps/CVE-2017-5645 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2019/12/19/2 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97702 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1040200 http://www.securit • CWE-502: Deserialization of Untrusted Data •