| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| On versions 15.0.0-15.1.0.1, 14.1.0-14.1.2.3, 13.1.0-13.1.3.3, and 12.1.0-12.1.5.1, BIG-IP systems set up for connection mirroring in a high availability (HA) pair transfer sensitive cryptographic objects over an insecure communications channel. This is a control plane issue which is exposed only on the network used for connection mirroring. |
| Grandstream HT800 series firmware version 1.0.17.5 and below contain a backdoor in the SSH service. An authenticated remote attacker can obtain a root shell by correctly answering a challenge prompt. |
| Spring Security versions 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4, 5.1.x prior to 5.1.10, 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16 and 4.2.x prior to 4.2.16 use a fixed null initialization vector with CBC Mode in the implementation of the queryable text encryptor. A malicious user with access to the data that has been encrypted using such an encryptor may be able to derive the unencrypted values using a dictionary attack. |
| Opencast before 8.1 stores passwords using the rather outdated and cryptographically insecure MD5 hash algorithm. Furthermore, the hashes are salted using the username instead of a random salt, causing hashes for users with the same username and password to collide which is problematic especially for popular users like the default `admin` user. This essentially means that for an attacker, it might be feasible to reconstruct a user's password given access to these hashes. Note that attackers needing access to the hashes means that they must gain access to the database in which these are stored first to be able to start cracking the passwords. The problem is addressed in Opencast 8.1 which now uses the modern and much stronger bcrypt password hashing algorithm for storing passwords. Note, that old hashes remain MD5 until the password is updated. For a list of users whose password hashes are stored using MD5, take a look at the `/user-utils/users/md5.json` REST endpoint. |
| In Django User Sessions (django-user-sessions) before 1.7.1, the views provided allow users to terminate specific sessions. The session key is used to identify sessions, and thus included in the rendered HTML. In itself this is not a problem. However if the website has an XSS vulnerability, the session key could be extracted by the attacker and a session takeover could happen. |
| IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence 5.2.6 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 192427. |
| IBM Jazz Team Server products use weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 192422. |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.0.3.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 191814. |
| IBM Emptoris Strategic Supply Management 10.1.3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 190989. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.1.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 189965. |
| IBM Curam Social Program Management 7.0.9 and 7.0.10 uses MD5 algorithm for hashing token in a single instance which less safe than default SHA-256 cryptographic algorithm used throughout the Cúram application. IBM X-Force ID: 189156. |
| IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1 (CP4S) uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms during negotiation could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. |
| IBM Data Risk Manager (iDNA) 2.0.6 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184927. |
| IBM Data Risk Manager (iDNA) 2.0.6 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184925. |
| IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184812. |
| IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184819. |
| IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184800. |
| IBM API Connect V2018.4.1.0 through 2018.4.1.11 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 181324. |
| IBM Spectrum Scale 5.0.0.0 through 5.0.4.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 179158. |
| IBM Planning Analytics Local 2.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 179001. |
