| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM Maximo Application Suite - Monitor Component 8.10, 8.11, and 9.0 could disclose information in the form of the hard-coded cryptographic key to an attacker that has compromised environment. |
| Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key vulnerability in ABB RMC-100, ABB RMC-100 LITE.
When the REST interface is enabled by the user, and an attacker gains access to
source code and control network, the attacker can bypass the REST interface authentication and gain access to MQTT configuration data.
This issue affects RMC-100: from 2105457-043 through 2105457-045; RMC-100 LITE: from 2106229-015 through 2106229-016. |
| Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key vulnerability in ABB RMC-100, ABB RMC-100 LITE.
An attacker can gain access to salted information to decrypt MQTT information.
This issue affects RMC-100: from 2105457-043 through 2105457-045; RMC-100 LITE: from 2106229-015 through 2106229-016. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM i800 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i801 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i802 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM i803 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M2100 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M2200 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM M969 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC30 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RP110 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600F (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS1600T (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS400 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS401 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416P (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS8000 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000A (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000H (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS8000T (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RS900GP (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-C01 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-XX (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-C01 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-XX (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS900W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS910W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS920L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS920W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS930L (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS930W (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS940G (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RS969 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2200 (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG907R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG908C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG909R (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG910C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V4.X (All versions), RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V5.X (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RSL910 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228 (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST2228P (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916C (All versions < V5.10.0), RUGGEDCOM RST916P (All versions < V5.10.0). The affected products support insecure cryptographic algorithms. An attacker could leverage these legacy algorithms to achieve a man-in-the-middle attack or impersonate communicating parties. |
| Windows Kerberos Information Disclosure Vulnerability |
| Azure Storage Library Information Disclosure Vulnerability |
| The VNC authentication mechanism bases on a challenge-response system where both server and client use the same password for encryption. The challenge is sent from the server to the client, is encrypted by the client and sent back. The server does the same encryption locally and if the responses match it is prooven that the client knows the correct password. Since all VNC communication is unencrypted, an attacker can obtain the challenge and response and try to derive the password from this information. |
| Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm, Use of Password Hash
With Insufficient Computational Effort, Use of Weak Hash, Use of a
One-Way Hash with a Predictable Salt vulnerabilities in Beta80 "Life 1st Identity Manager"
enable an attacker with access to
password hashes
to bruteforce user passwords or find a collision to ultimately while attempting to gain access to a target application that uses "Life 1st Identity Manager" as a service for authentication.
This issue affects Life 1st: 1.5.2.14234. |
| Inadequate Encryption Strength vulnerability in Apache Answer.
This issue affects Apache Answer: through 1.4.0.
The ids generated using the UUID v1 version are to some extent not secure enough. It can cause the generated token to be predictable.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.4.1, which fixes the issue. |
| A vulnerability was found in gooaclok819 sublinkX up to 1.8. It has been declared as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the file middlewares/jwt.go. The manipulation with the input sublink leads to use of hard-coded cryptographic key
. The attack can be initiated remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 1.9 is able to address this issue. The patch is identified as 778d26aef723daa58df98c8060c43f5bf5d1b10b. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. |
| During the initial setup of the device the user connects to an access
point broadcast by the Sight Bulb Pro. During the negotiation, AES
Encryption keys are passed in cleartext. If captured, an attacker may be
able to decrypt communications between the management app and the Sight
Bulb Pro which may include sensitive information such as network
credentials. |
| RLPx 5 has two CTR streams based on the same key, IV, and nonce. This can facilitate decryption on a private network. |
| Cyberduck and Mountain Duck improper handle TLS certificate pinning for untrusted certificates (e.g., self-signed), since the certificate fingerprint is stored as SHA-1, although SHA-1 is considered weak.
This issue affects Cyberduck: through 9.1.6; Mountain Duck: through 4.17.5. |
| DeviceFarmer stf v3.6.6 suffers from Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm. |
| Consensys Discovery versions less than 0.4.5 uses the same AES/GCM nonce for the entire session. which should ideally be unique for every message. The node's private key isn't compromised, only the session key generated for specific peer communication is exposed.
|
| The authentication cookies are generated using an algorithm based on the username, hardcoded secret and the up-time, and can be guessed in a reasonable time. |
| It is possible to download the configuration backup without authorization and decrypt included passwords using hardcoded static key. |
| In the Elliptic package 6.5.6 for Node.js, EDDSA signature malleability occurs because there is a missing signature length check, and thus zero-valued bytes can be removed or appended. |
| In the Elliptic package 6.5.6 for Node.js, ECDSA signature malleability occurs because there is a missing check for whether the leading bit of r and s is zero. |
| Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation
contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications running
on PowerPC CPU based platforms if the CPU provides vector instructions.
Impact summary: If an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC
algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various
application dependent consequences.
The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL for
PowerPC CPUs restores the contents of vector registers in a different order
than they are saved. Thus the contents of some of these vector registers
are corrupted when returning to the caller. The vulnerable code is used only
on newer PowerPC processors supporting the PowerISA 2.07 instructions.
The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can
be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not
depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst
consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application
process. However unless the compiler uses the vector registers for storing
pointers, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result
of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of
service.
The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the
CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data)
algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol
versions 1.2 and 1.3. If this cipher is enabled on the server a malicious
client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used. This implies that
TLS server applications using OpenSSL can be potentially impacted. However
we are currently not aware of any concrete application that would be affected
by this issue therefore we consider this a Low severity security issue. |
