Vulnerabilities (CVE)

Filtered by vendor Netapp Subscribe
Filtered by product Hci Storage Nodes
Total 5 CVE
CVE Vendors Products Updated CVSS v2 CVSS v3
CVE-2024-32487 3 Debian, Greenwoodsoftware, Netapp 6 Debian Linux, Less, Bootstrap Os and 3 more 2025-06-17 N/A 8.6 HIGH
less through 653 allows OS command execution via a newline character in the name of a file, because quoting is mishandled in filename.c. Exploitation typically requires use with attacker-controlled file names, such as the files extracted from an untrusted archive. Exploitation also requires the LESSOPEN environment variable, but this is set by default in many common cases.
CVE-2016-5195 7 Canonical, Debian, Fedoraproject and 4 more 18 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Fedora and 15 more 2025-04-12 7.2 HIGH 7.0 HIGH
Race condition in mm/gup.c in the Linux kernel 2.x through 4.x before 4.8.3 allows local users to gain privileges by leveraging incorrect handling of a copy-on-write (COW) feature to write to a read-only memory mapping, as exploited in the wild in October 2016, aka "Dirty COW."
CVE-2023-32250 2 Linux, Netapp 7 Linux Kernel, H300s, H410s and 4 more 2024-11-21 N/A 9.0 CRITICAL
A flaw was found in the Linux kernel's ksmbd, a high-performance in-kernel SMB server. The specific flaw exists within the processing of SMB2_SESSION_SETUP commands. The issue results from the lack of proper locking when performing operations on an object. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the kernel.
CVE-2020-12464 2 Linux, Netapp 10 Linux Kernel, Active Iq Unified Manager, Aff A700s and 7 more 2024-11-21 7.2 HIGH 6.7 MEDIUM
usb_sg_cancel in drivers/usb/core/message.c in the Linux kernel before 5.6.8 has a use-after-free because a transfer occurs without a reference, aka CID-056ad39ee925.
CVE-2017-7657 5 Debian, Eclipse, Hp and 2 more 18 Debian Linux, Jetty, Xp P9000 and 15 more 2024-11-21 7.5 HIGH 9.8 CRITICAL
In Eclipse Jetty, versions 9.2.x and older, 9.3.x (all configurations), and 9.4.x (non-default configuration with RFC2616 compliance enabled), transfer-encoding chunks are handled poorly. The chunk length parsing was vulnerable to an integer overflow. Thus a large chunk size could be interpreted as a smaller chunk size and content sent as chunk body could be interpreted as a pipelined request. If Jetty was deployed behind an intermediary that imposed some authorization and that intermediary allowed arbitrarily large chunks to be passed on unchanged, then this flaw could be used to bypass the authorization imposed by the intermediary as the fake pipelined request would not be interpreted by the intermediary as a request.