Filtered by vendor Octopus
Subscriptions
Total
85 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-2975 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-09-19 | 8.8 High |
| A race condition was identified through which privilege escalation was possible in certain configurations. | ||||
| CVE-2023-1904 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-09-18 | 4.2 Medium |
| In affected versions of Octopus Server it is possible for the OpenID client secret to be logged in clear text during the configuration of Octopus Server. | ||||
| CVE-2023-4509 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-09-18 | 4.3 Medium |
| It is possible for an API key to be logged in clear text in the audit log file after an invalid login attempt. | ||||
| CVE-2018-11320 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-09-16 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 2018.4.4 through 2018.5.1, Octopus variables that are sourced from the target do not have sensitive values obfuscated in the deployment logs. | ||||
| CVE-2019-8944 | 1 Octopus | 2 Octopus Deploy, Octopus Server | 2024-09-16 | N/A |
| An Information Exposure issue in the Terraform deployment step in Octopus Deploy before 2019.1.8 (and before 2018.10.4 LTS) allows remote authenticated users to view sensitive Terraform output variables via log files. | ||||
| CVE-2017-16810 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-09-16 | N/A |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the All Variables tab in Octopus Deploy 3.4.0-3.13.6 (fixed in 3.13.7) allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the Variable Set Name parameter. | ||||
| CVE-2018-12884 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-09-16 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 3.0 onwards (before 2018.6.7), an authenticated user with incorrect permissions may be able to create Accounts under the Infrastructure menu. | ||||
| CVE-2018-12089 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-09-16 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy version 2018.5.1 to 2018.5.7, a user with Task View is able to view a password for a Service Fabric Cluster, when the Service Fabric Cluster target is configured in Azure Active Directory security mode and a deployment is executed with OctopusPrintVariables set to True. This is fixed in 2018.6.0. | ||||
| CVE-2017-17665 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy before 4.1.3, the machine update process doesn't check that the user has access to all environments. This allows an access-control bypass because the set of environments to which a machine is scoped may include environments in which the user lacks access. | ||||
| CVE-2017-16801 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Octopus Deploy 3.7.0-3.17.13 (fixed in 3.17.14) allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the Step Template Name parameter. | ||||
| CVE-2017-15610 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| An issue was discovered in Octopus before 3.17.7. When the special Guest user account is granted the CertificateExportPrivateKey permission, and Guest Access is enabled for the Octopus Server, an attacker can sign in as the Guest account and export Certificates managed by Octopus, including the private key. | ||||
| CVE-2017-15611 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus before 3.17.7, an authenticated user who was explicitly granted the permission to invite new users (aka UserInvite) can invite users to teams with escalated privileges. | ||||
| CVE-2017-15609 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| Octopus before 3.17.7 allows attackers to obtain sensitive cleartext information by reading a variable JSON file in certain situations involving Offline Drop Targets. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11348 | 1 Octopus | 2 Octopus Deploy, Octopus Server | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 3.x before 3.15.4, an authenticated user with PackagePush permission to upload packages could upload a maliciously crafted NuGet package, potentially overwriting other packages or modifying system files. This is a directory traversal in the PackageId value. | ||||
| CVE-2018-18850 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Server | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 2018.8.0 through 2018.9.x before 2018.9.1, an authenticated user with permission to modify deployment processes could upload a maliciously crafted YAML configuration, potentially allowing for remote execution of arbitrary code, running in the same context as the Octopus Server (for self-hosted installations by default, SYSTEM). | ||||
| CVE-2018-10581 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 3.4.x before 2018.4.7, an authenticated user is able to view/update/save variable values within the Tenant Variables area for Environments that do not exist within their associated Team scoping. This occurs in situations where this authenticated user also belongs to multiple teams, where one of the Teams has the VariableEdit permission or VariableView permissions for the Environment. | ||||
| CVE-2018-10550 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy before 2018.4.7, target and tenant tag variable scopes were not checked against the list of tenants the user has access to. | ||||
| CVE-2018-9039 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy 2.0 and later before 2018.3.7, an authenticated user, with variable edit permissions, can scope some variables to targets greater than their permissions should allow. In other words, they can see machines beyond their team's scoped environments. | ||||
| CVE-2018-5706 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| An issue was discovered in Octopus Deploy before 4.1.9. Any user with user editing permissions can modify teams to give themselves Administer System permissions even if they didn't have them, as demonstrated by use of the RoleEdit or TeamEdit permission. | ||||
| CVE-2018-4862 | 1 Octopus | 1 Octopus Deploy | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| In Octopus Deploy versions 3.2.11 - 4.1.5 (fixed in 4.1.6), an authenticated user with ProcessEdit permission could reference an Azure account in such a way as to bypass the scoping restrictions, resulting in a potential escalation of privileges. | ||||