| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Mailman 2.0.x before 2.0.6 allows remote attackers to gain access to list administrative pages when there is an empty site or list password, which is not properly handled during the call to the crypt function during authentication. |
| Vulnerability in Mailman 2.0.1 and earlier allows list administrators to obtain user passwords. |
| Mailman 1.1 allows list administrators to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the %(listname) macro expansion. |
| The password generation in mailman before 2.1.5 generates only 5 million unique passwords, which makes it easier for remote attackers to guess passwords via a brute force attack. |
| The 55_options_traceback.dpatch patch for mailman 2.1.5 in Ubuntu 4.10 displays a different error message depending on whether the e-mail address is subscribed to a private list, which allows remote attackers to determine the list membership for a given e-mail address. |
| Directory traversal vulnerability in the true_path function in private.py for Mailman 2.1.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via ".../....///" sequences, which are not properly cleansed by regular expressions that are intended to remove "../" and "./" sequences. |
| Mailman 2.1.4 through 2.1.6 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a message that causes the server to "fail with an Overflow on bad date data in a processed message," a different vulnerability than CVE-2005-3573. |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the create CGI script for Mailman before 2.1.3 allows remote attackers to steal cookies of other users. |
| The attachment scrubber (Scrubber.py) in Mailman 2.1.5 and earlier, when using Python's library email module 2.5, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (mailing list delivery failure) via a multipart MIME message with a single part that has two blank lines between the first boundary and the end boundary. |
| Mailman before 2.1.5 allows remote attackers to obtain user passwords via a crafted email request to the Mailman server. |
| CRLF injection vulnerability in Utils.py in Mailman before 2.1.9rc1 allows remote attackers to spoof messages in the error log and possibly trick the administrator into visiting malicious URLs via CRLF sequences in the URI. |
| The wrapper program in mailman 2.0beta3 and 2.0beta4 does not properly cleanse untrusted format strings, which allows local users to gain privileges. |
| Cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in Mailman before 2.0.11 allow remote attackers to execute script via (1) the admin login page, or (2) the Pipermail index summaries. |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the private archive script (private.py) in GNU Mailman 2.1.7 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the action argument. |
| Cross-site scripting vulnerability in Mailman email archiver before 2.08 allows attackers to obtain sensitive information or authentication credentials via a malicious link that is accessed by other web users. |
| An issue was discovered in Mailman Core before 3.3.5. An attacker with access to the REST API could use timing attacks to determine the value of the configured REST API password and then make arbitrary REST API calls. The REST API is bound to localhost by default, limiting the ability for attackers to exploit this, but can optionally be made to listen on other interfaces. |
| In GNU Mailman before 2.1.38, a list member or moderator can get a CSRF token and craft an admin request (using that token) to set a new admin password or make other changes. |
| In GNU Mailman before 2.1.36, the CSRF token for the Cgi/admindb.py admindb page contains an encrypted version of the list admin password. This could potentially be cracked by a moderator via an offline brute-force attack. |
| In GNU Mailman before 2.1.36, a crafted URL to the Cgi/options.py user options page can execute arbitrary JavaScript for XSS. |
| GNU Mailman before 2.1.35 may allow remote Privilege Escalation. A csrf_token value is not specific to a single user account. An attacker can obtain a value within the context of an unprivileged user account, and then use that value in a CSRF attack against an admin (e.g., for account takeover). |
