| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Wrongthink peer-to-peer, end-to-end encrypted messenger with PeerJS and Axolotl ratchet. In wrongthink from version 2.0.0 and before 2.3.0 there was a set of vulnerabilities causing inadequate encryption strength. Part of the secret identity key was disclosed by the fingerprint used for connection. Additionally, the safety number was improperly calculated. It was computed using part of one of the public identity keys instead of being derived from both public identity keys. This caused issues in computing safety numbers which would potentially be exploitable in the real world. Additionally there was inadequate encryption strength due to use of 1024-bit DSA keys. These issues are all fixed in version 2.3.0. |
| IBM Resilient SOAR V38.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 199238. |
| IBM Security Verify Access Docker 10.0.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 197969 |
| IBM Cloud Pak System 2.3.0 through 2.3.3.3 Interim Fix 1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 197498. |
| IBM Security Verify Bridge uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 196617. |
| IBM Security Guardium 11.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 196280. |
| IBM Security Verify Information Queue 1.0.6 and 1.0.7 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 196184. |
| IBM QRadar SIEM 7.3 and 7.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 196074. |
| IBM Guardium Data Encryption (GDE) 3.0.0.3 and 4.0.0.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195711. |
| IBM Cloud Pak for Applications 4.3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195361. |
| IBM Cloud Pak for Applications 4.3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195031. |
| IBM QRadar SIEM 7.3.0 to 7.3.3 Patch 8 and 7.4.0 to 7.4.3 GA uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 194448. |
| A flaw was found in Nettle in versions before 3.7.2, where several Nettle signature verification functions (GOST DSA, EDDSA & ECDSA) result in the Elliptic Curve Cryptography point (ECC) multiply function being called with out-of-range scalers, possibly resulting in incorrect results. This flaw allows an attacker to force an invalid signature, causing an assertion failure or possible validation. The highest threat to this vulnerability is to confidentiality, integrity, as well as system availability. |
| The use of multiple hard-coded cryptographic keys in cSRX Series software in Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an attacker to take control of any instance of a cSRX deployment through device management services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS on cSRX Series: All versions prior to 20.2R3; 20.3 versions prior to 20.3R2; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R2. |
| Firmware developed by Shenzhen Hichip Vision Technology (V6 through V20), as used by many different vendors in millions of Internet of Things devices, suffers from cryptographic issues that allow remote attackers to access user session data, as demonstrated by eavesdropping on user video/audio streams, capturing credentials, and compromising devices. This affects products marketed under the following brand names: Accfly, Alptop, Anlink, Besdersec, BOAVISION, COOAU, CPVAN, Ctronics, D3D Security, Dericam, Elex System, Elite Security, ENSTER, ePGes, Escam, FLOUREON, GENBOLT, Hongjingtian (HJT), ICAMI, Iegeek, Jecurity, Jennov, KKMoon, LEFTEK, Loosafe, Luowice, Nesuniq, Nettoly, ProElite, QZT, Royallite, SDETER, SV3C, SY2L, Tenvis, ThinkValue, TOMLOV, TPTEK, WGCC, and ZILINK. |
| CS2 Network P2P through 3.x, as used in millions of Internet of Things devices, suffers from an information exposure flaw that exposes user session data to supernodes in the network, as demonstrated by passively eavesdropping on user video/audio streams, capturing credentials, and compromising devices. |
| In Apache NiFi 1.2.0 to 1.11.4, the NiFi UI and API were protected by mandating TLS v1.2, as well as listening connections established by processors like ListenHTTP, HandleHttpRequest, etc. However intracluster communication such as cluster request replication, Site-to-Site, and load balanced queues continued to support TLS v1.0 or v1.1. |
| ARRIS TG1692A devices allow remote attackers to discover the administrator login name and password by reading the /login page and performing base64 decoding. |
| In GolfBuddy Course Manager 1.1, passwords are sent (with base64 encoding) via a GET request. |
| FusionCompute versions 8.0.0 have an insecure encryption algorithm vulnerability. Attackers with high permissions can exploit this vulnerability to cause information leak. |
