Total
109 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-48224 | 1 Ethyca | 1 Fides | 2024-08-29 | 8.2 High |
| Fides is an open-source privacy engineering platform for managing the fulfillment of data privacy requests in a runtime environment, and the enforcement of privacy regulations in code. The Fides Privacy Center allows data subject users to submit privacy and consent requests to data controller users of the Fides web application. Privacy requests allow data subjects to submit a request to access all person data held by the data controller, or delete/erase it. Consent request allows data subject users to modify their privacy preferences for how the data controller uses their personal data e.g. data sales and sharing consent opt-in/opt-out. If `subject_identity_verification_required` in the `[execution]` section of `fides.toml` or the env var `FIDES__EXECUTION__SUBJECT_IDENTITY_VERIFICATION_REQUIRED` is set to `True` on the fides webserver backend, data subjects are sent a one-time code to their email address or phone number, depending on messaging configuration, and the one-time code must be entered in the Privacy Center UI by the data subject before the privacy or consent request is submitted. It was identified that the one-time code values for these requests were generated by the python `random` module, a cryptographically weak pseduo-random number generator (PNRG). If an attacker generates several hundred consecutive one-time codes, this vulnerability allows the attacker to predict all future one-time code values during the lifetime of the backend python process. There is no security impact on data access requests as the personal data download package is not shared in the Privacy Center itself. However, this vulnerability allows an attacker to (i) submit a verified data erasure request, resulting in deletion of data for the targeted user and (ii) submit a verified consent request, modifying a user's privacy preferences. The vulnerability has been patched in Fides version `2.24.0`. Users are advised to upgrade to this version or later to secure their systems against this threat. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2024-31497 | 6 Fedoraproject, Filezilla-project, Putty and 3 more | 6 Fedora, Filezilla Client, Putty and 3 more | 2024-08-19 | 5.9 Medium |
| In PuTTY 0.68 through 0.80 before 0.81, biased ECDSA nonce generation allows an attacker to recover a user's NIST P-521 secret key via a quick attack in approximately 60 signatures. This is especially important in a scenario where an adversary is able to read messages signed by PuTTY or Pageant. The required set of signed messages may be publicly readable because they are stored in a public Git service that supports use of SSH for commit signing, and the signatures were made by Pageant through an agent-forwarding mechanism. In other words, an adversary may already have enough signature information to compromise a victim's private key, even if there is no further use of vulnerable PuTTY versions. After a key compromise, an adversary may be able to conduct supply-chain attacks on software maintained in Git. A second, independent scenario is that the adversary is an operator of an SSH server to which the victim authenticates (for remote login or file copy), even though this server is not fully trusted by the victim, and the victim uses the same private key for SSH connections to other services operated by other entities. Here, the rogue server operator (who would otherwise have no way to determine the victim's private key) can derive the victim's private key, and then use it for unauthorized access to those other services. If the other services include Git services, then again it may be possible to conduct supply-chain attacks on software maintained in Git. This also affects, for example, FileZilla before 3.67.0, WinSCP before 6.3.3, TortoiseGit before 2.15.0.1, and TortoiseSVN through 1.14.6. | ||||
| CVE-2008-3280 | 1 Openid | 1 Openid | 2024-08-07 | 5.9 Medium |
| It was found that various OpenID Providers (OPs) had TLS Server Certificates that used weak keys, as a result of the Debian Predictable Random Number Generator (CVE-2008-0166). In combination with the DNS Cache Poisoning issue (CVE-2008-1447) and the fact that almost all SSL/TLS implementations do not consult CRLs (currently an untracked issue), this means that it is impossible to rely on these OPs. | ||||
| CVE-2008-0166 | 3 Canonical, Debian, Openssl | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Openssl | 2024-08-07 | 7.5 High |
| OpenSSL 0.9.8c-1 up to versions before 0.9.8g-9 on Debian-based operating systems uses a random number generator that generates predictable numbers, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct brute force guessing attacks against cryptographic keys. | ||||
| CVE-2009-3278 | 1 Qnap | 4 Ts-239 Pro, Ts-239 Pro Firmware, Ts-639 Pro and 1 more | 2024-08-07 | 5.5 Medium |
| The QNAP TS-239 Pro and TS-639 Pro with firmware 2.1.7 0613, 3.1.0 0627, and 3.1.1 0815 use the rand library function to generate a certain recovery key, which makes it easier for local users to determine this key via a brute-force attack. | ||||
| CVE-2009-3238 | 5 Canonical, Linux, Opensuse and 2 more | 7 Ubuntu Linux, Linux Kernel, Opensuse and 4 more | 2024-08-07 | 5.5 Medium |
| The get_random_int function in drivers/char/random.c in the Linux kernel before 2.6.30 produces insufficiently random numbers, which allows attackers to predict the return value, and possibly defeat protection mechanisms based on randomization, via vectors that leverage the function's tendency to "return the same value over and over again for long stretches of time." | ||||
| CVE-2009-2367 | 1 Iomega | 2 Storcenter Pro, Storcenter Pro Firmware | 2024-08-07 | 9.8 Critical |
| cgi-bin/makecgi-pro in Iomega StorCenter Pro generates predictable session IDs, which allows remote attackers to hijack active sessions and gain privileges via brute force guessing attacks on the session_id parameter. | ||||
| CVE-2011-4574 | 1 Polarssl | 1 Polarssl | 2024-08-07 | 9.8 Critical |
| PolarSSL versions prior to v1.1 use the HAVEGE random number generation algorithm. At its heart, this uses timing information based on the processor's high resolution timer (the RDTSC instruction). This instruction can be virtualized, and some virtual machine hosts have chosen to disable this instruction, returning 0s or predictable results. | ||||
| CVE-2012-6124 | 1 Call-cc | 1 Chicken | 2024-08-06 | 5.3 Medium |
| A casting error in Chicken before 4.8.0 on 64-bit platform caused the random number generator to return a constant value. NOTE: the vendor states "This function wasn't used for security purposes (and is advertised as being unsuitable)." | ||||
| CVE-2012-5508 | 1 Plone | 1 Plone | 2024-08-06 | N/A |
| The error pages in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allow remote attackers to obtain random numbers and derive the PRNG state for password resets via unspecified vectors. NOTE: this identifier was SPLIT per ADT2 due to different vulnerability types. CVE-2012-6661 was assigned for the PRNG reseeding issue in Zope. | ||||
| CVE-2013-4347 | 2 Redhat, Urbanairship | 3 Satellite, Satellite Capsule, Python-oauth2 | 2024-08-06 | N/A |
| The (1) make_nonce, (2) generate_nonce, and (3) generate_verifier functions in SimpleGeo python-oauth2 uses weak random numbers to generate nonces, which makes it easier for remote attackers to guess the nonce via a brute force attack. | ||||
| CVE-2014-9293 | 2 Ntp, Redhat | 3 Ntp, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2024-08-06 | N/A |
| The config_auth function in ntpd in NTP before 4.2.7p11, when an auth key is not configured, improperly generates a key, which makes it easier for remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms via a brute-force attack. | ||||
| CVE-2014-9294 | 2 Ntp, Redhat | 3 Ntp, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2024-08-06 | N/A |
| util/ntp-keygen.c in ntp-keygen in NTP before 4.2.7p230 uses a weak RNG seed, which makes it easier for remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms via a brute-force attack. | ||||
| CVE-2015-9435 | 1 Dash10 | 1 Oauth Server | 2024-08-06 | 9.8 Critical |
| The oauth2-provider plugin before 3.1.5 for WordPress has incorrect generation of random numbers. | ||||
| CVE-2016-1000343 | 3 Bouncycastle, Debian, Redhat | 5 Legion-of-the-bouncy-castle-java-crytography-api, Debian Linux, Jboss Fuse and 2 more | 2024-08-06 | N/A |
| In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA key pair generator generates a weak private key if used with default values. If the JCA key pair generator is not explicitly initialised with DSA parameters, 1.55 and earlier generates a private value assuming a 1024 bit key size. In earlier releases this can be dealt with by explicitly passing parameters to the key pair generator. | ||||
| CVE-2016-1618 | 2 Google, Redhat | 2 Chrome, Rhel Extras | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| Blink, as used in Google Chrome before 48.0.2564.82, does not ensure that a proper cryptographicallyRandomValues random number generator is used, which makes it easier for remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms via unspecified vectors. | ||||
| CVE-2017-17845 | 2 Debian, Enigmail | 2 Debian Linux, Enigmail | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| An issue was discovered in Enigmail before 1.9.9. Improper Random Secret Generation occurs because Math.Random() is used by pretty Easy privacy (pEp), aka TBE-01-001. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11671 | 2 Gnu, Redhat | 2 Gcc, Enterprise Linux | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| Under certain circumstances, the ix86_expand_builtin function in i386.c in GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) version 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 5 before 5.5, and 6 before 6.4 will generate instruction sequences that clobber the status flag of the RDRAND and RDSEED intrinsics before it can be read, potentially causing failures of these instructions to go unreported. This could potentially lead to less randomness in random number generation. | ||||
| CVE-2017-9230 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin | 2024-08-05 | 7.5 High |
| The Bitcoin Proof-of-Work algorithm does not consider a certain attack methodology related to 80-byte block headers with a variety of initial 64-byte chunks followed by the same 16-byte chunk, multiple candidate root values ending with the same 4 bytes, and calculations involving sqrt numbers. This violates the security assumptions of (1) the choice of input, outside of the dedicated nonce area, fed into the Proof-of-Work function should not change its difficulty to evaluate and (2) every Proof-of-Work function execution should be independent. NOTE: a number of persons feel that this methodology is a benign mining optimization, not a vulnerability | ||||
| CVE-2017-8081 | 1 Cagintranetworks | 1 Getsimple Cms | 2024-08-05 | N/A |
| Poor cryptographic salt initialization in admin/inc/template_functions.php in GetSimple CMS 3.3.13 allows a network attacker to escalate privileges to an arbitrary user or conduct CSRF attacks via calculation of a session cookie or CSRF nonce. | ||||