Total
396 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-33283 | 1 Marvalglobal | 1 Msm | 2025-01-07 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| Marval MSM through 14.19.0.12476 uses a static encryption key for secrets. An attacker that gains access to encrypted secrets can decrypt them by using this key. | |||||
| CVE-2023-32414 | 1 Apple | 1 Macos | 2024-12-05 | N/A | 8.6 HIGH |
| The issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Ventura 13.4. An app may be able to break out of its sandbox. | |||||
| CVE-2024-38277 | 2024-12-04 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM | ||
| A unique key should be generated for a user's QR login key and their auto-login key, so the same key cannot be used interchangeably between the two. | |||||
| CVE-2024-33662 | 2024-12-04 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH | ||
| Portainer before 2.20.2 improperly uses an encryption algorithm in the AesEncrypt function. | |||||
| CVE-2023-37301 | 1 Mediawiki | 1 Mediawiki | 2024-11-27 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in SubmitEntityAction in Wikibase in MediaWiki through 1.39.3. Because it doesn't use EditEntity for undo and restore, the intended interaction with AbuseFilter does not occur. | |||||
| CVE-2020-3549 | 1 Cisco | 2 Firepower Threat Defense, Secure Firewall Management Center | 2024-11-26 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| A vulnerability in the sftunnel functionality of Cisco Firepower Management Center (FMC) Software and Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to obtain the device registration hash. The vulnerability is due to insufficient sftunnel negotiation protection during initial device registration. An attacker in a man-in-the-middle position could exploit this vulnerability by intercepting a specific flow of the sftunnel communication between an FMC device and an FTD device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to decrypt and modify the sftunnel communication between FMC and FTD devices, allowing the attacker to modify configuration data sent from an FMC device to an FTD device or alert data sent from an FTD device to an FMC device. | |||||
| CVE-2024-45719 | 2024-11-22 | N/A | 2.6 LOW | ||
| Inadequate Encryption Strength vulnerability in Apache Answer. This issue affects Apache Answer: through 1.4.0. The ids generated using the UUID v1 version are to some extent not secure enough. It can cause the generated token to be predictable. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.4.1, which fixes the issue. | |||||
| CVE-2024-45273 | 2 Helmholz, Mbconnectline | 27 Myrex24 V2 Virtual Server, Rex 100, Rex 100 Firmware and 24 more | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 8.4 HIGH |
| An unauthenticated local attacker can decrypt the devices config file and therefore compromise the device due to a weak implementation of the encryption used. | |||||
| CVE-2024-40761 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| Inadequate Encryption Strength vulnerability in Apache Answer. This issue affects Apache Answer: through 1.3.5. Using the MD5 value of a user's email to access Gravatar is insecure and can lead to the leakage of user email. The official recommendation is to use SHA256 instead. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.4.0, which fixes the issue. | |||||
| CVE-2024-3387 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| A weak (low bit strength) device certificate in Palo Alto Networks Panorama software enables an attacker to perform a meddler-in-the-middle (MitM) attack to capture encrypted traffic between the Panorama management server and the firewalls it manages. With sufficient computing resources, the attacker could break encrypted communication and expose sensitive information that is shared between the management server and the firewalls. | |||||
| CVE-2024-39928 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH | ||
| In Apache Linkis <= 1.5.0, a Random string security vulnerability in Spark EngineConn, random string generated by the Token when starting Py4j uses the Commons Lang's RandomStringUtils. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.6.0, which fixes this issue. | |||||
| CVE-2024-38867 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 5.9 MEDIUM | ||
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIPROTEC 5 6MD84 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD89 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SX82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SX85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UM85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BD-2FO (All versions < V9.62), SIPROTEC 5 Compact 7SX800 (CP050) (All versions < V9.64). The affected devices are supporting weak ciphers on several ports (443/tcp for web, 4443/tcp for DIGSI 5 and configurable port for syslog over TLS). This could allow an unauthorized attacker in a man-in-the-middle position to decrypt any data passed over to and from those ports. | |||||
| CVE-2024-34113 | 1 Adobe | 1 Coldfusion | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| ColdFusion versions 2023u7, 2021u13 and earlier are affected by a Weak Cryptography for Passwords vulnerability that could result in a security feature bypass. This vulnerability arises due to the use of insufficiently strong cryptographic algorithms or flawed implementation that compromises the confidentiality of password data. An attacker could exploit this weakness to decrypt or guess passwords, potentially gaining unauthorized access to protected resources. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. | |||||
| CVE-2024-30119 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 3.7 LOW | ||
| HCL DRYiCE Optibot Reset Station is impacted by a missing Strict Transport Security Header. This could allow an attacker to intercept or manipulate data during redirection. | |||||
| CVE-2024-28860 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 8.0 HIGH | ||
| Cilium is a networking, observability, and security solution with an eBPF-based dataplane. Users of IPsec transparent encryption in Cilium may be vulnerable to cryptographic attacks that render the transparent encryption ineffective. In particular, Cilium is vulnerable to chosen plaintext, key recovery, replay attacks by a man-in-the-middle attacker. These attacks are possible due to an ESP sequence number collision when multiple nodes are configured with the same key. Fixed versions of Cilium use unique keys for each IPsec tunnel established between nodes, resolving all of the above attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.13.13, 1.14.9, and 1.15.3. | |||||
| CVE-2024-28755 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.5.x before 3.6.0. When an SSL context was reset with the mbedtls_ssl_session_reset() API, the maximum TLS version to be negotiated was not restored to the configured one. An attacker was able to prevent an Mbed TLS server from establishing any TLS 1.3 connection, potentially resulting in a Denial of Service or forced version downgrade from TLS 1.3 to TLS 1.2. | |||||
| CVE-2024-25102 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH | ||
| This vulnerability exists in AppSamvid software due to the usage of a weaker cryptographic algorithm (hash) SHA1 in user login component. An attacker with local administrative privileges could exploit this to obtain the password of AppSamvid on the targeted system. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability could allow the attacker to take complete control of the application on the targeted system. | |||||
| CVE-2024-23656 | 1 Linuxfoundation | 1 Dex | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| Dex is an identity service that uses OpenID Connect to drive authentication for other apps. Dex 2.37.0 serves HTTPS with insecure TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1. `cmd/dex/serve.go` line 425 seemingly sets TLS 1.2 as minimum version, but the whole `tlsConfig` is ignored after `TLS cert reloader` was introduced in v2.37.0. Configured cipher suites are not respected either. This issue is fixed in Dex 2.38.0. | |||||
| CVE-2024-23580 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| HCL DRYiCE Optibot Reset Station is impacted by insecure encryption of One-Time Passwords (OTPs). This could allow an attacker with access to the database to recover some or all encrypted values. | |||||
| CVE-2024-23579 | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| HCL DRYiCE Optibot Reset Station is impacted by insecure encryption of security questions. This could allow an attacker with access to the database to recover some or all encrypted values. | |||||